Skip to main content

Full text of "The New Testament doctrines"

See other formats







Eleventh Thousand 

Elgin, 111. 
Brethren Publishing House 


Copyright, 1914 
By J. H. Moore 




Of which I became a member at the age of thirteen, 

In whose ministry I have served forty-three years, 

In whose interest I have occupied the editorial chair 
nearly half of my lifetime, 

And to whose helpful influence I am indebted for my 
attainments in the religious life, 




TSir.n-.D-rvjAL ¥i 

W YOv 

JAN 3 1 ^ 25 


It was in 1708 that eight devout men and women, 
residing in Schwarzenau, Germany, met from day 
to day to study the Scriptures, with a view of 
ascertaining the will of God, as set forth in the 
Sacred Volume. They put aside all creeds and con- 
\ fessions of faith, that they might be free to accept 

\ the whole truth as it came to them. After studying 

O the Word for months, it became evident that there 

1 was no body of people in all Europe, known to 

them, who, in their faith and practice, lined up 
^y with the form of doctrine enjoined upon the follow- 

^ ers of Christ. After much earnest prayer it oc- 

n curred to them that they could do no wiser thing 

J? than to form themselves into a working body, and 

r to restore to the church, thus constituted, the prim- 

itive order of worship and service. Being of one 
j^ mind and heart, regarding the teachings of the 

^- Gospel, they cut loose from all former church affilia- 

tions, agreed together in accepting the New Testa- 
ment as their rule of faith and practice, and pro- 
ceeded to carry out, step by step, what the Inspired 
Volume demands. 

Early one morning they went to the near-by river 
Eder, were buried with Christ in baptism, and the 
same day organized themselves into a Christian 
body, made choice of Alexander Mack as their min- 
ister, and began to preach and put into practice 



what they conceived to be the " all things " set forth 
in the Written Word. Having settled on the New 
Testament as their rule in all religious affairs, it 
was an easy matter to accept the light as it came 
to them. 

They builded better than they knew. The reform 
movement spread, and hundreds accepted the faith, 
but on account of persecution practically the whole 
membership emigrated to America from 1719 to 
1729. The plea of these earnest people was well 
received, and since then churches have been or- 
ganized from the Atlantic to the Pacific; Confer- 
ences have been formed; colleges have been built 
up ; foreign missions have been opened, and a splen- 
didly-equipped Publishing House has been estab- 
lished, with church and Sunday-school activities put 
into operation. 

It is in the interest of the teachings of this Chris- 
tian body that this treatise has been prepared, be- 
lieving that it will be appreciated by those who are 
looking for a brief and clear statement of the faith 
and practice of the Church of the Brethren. The 
author does not aim at literary finish. His purpose 
is to set forth the doctrines of the New Testament 
in the simplest possible manner, so they can be 
understood by any one who may chance to read the 
book. The chapters are short, and yet they are 
intimately related, and the line of thought is such 
as to make easy and, we trust, helpful reading. 

The Author. 

October 23, 1914, 

Subjects Treated 

Is There a God ? 11 

The Creator of All Things, 12 

His Fatherly Care, 12 

Man, the Highest Type, 13 

God's Revelation to Man, 14 

The Bible, God's Revelation, 15 

The Old Testament, 16 

The New Testament, 18 

John Introducing Christ, 19 

Christ the Head, 20 

Our Creed, 21 

He Came to Save Sinners, 22 

Love and Obedience, 23 

Offers Eternal Life, 24 

Preaching the Word, 25 

Hearing the Word, 26 

Faith, What It Is, and What It Does, 27 

Not by Faith Alone, 29 

Repentance, 30 

Confession, 31 

Baptism a Necessity, 32 

Baptism for Believers Only, 34 

Baptism, — the Purpose, 35 

Immersion, the Mode, 37 

The Meaning of Baptizo, 38 

Trine Immersion, the Form, 42 

The Ancient Practice, 44 


Some History, 46 

The Trinity, 48 

Not a Debatable Question, 51 

Some Figures, 52 

Bowing in Baptism, 53 

Laying On Hands, 55 

Sins Forgiven, 55 

Receiving the Holy Ghost, 56 

The New Birth, 57 

The Door Into the Church, 59 

A New Creature, 60 

Sealed With the Holy Spirit, 61 

The Divine and Human Parts in Conversion, 62 

Some Examples of Conversion, 65 

On the Day of Pentecost, 67 

Where the Three Thousand Were Baptized, 68 

Conversion of the Eunuch, 70 

Conversion of Saul, 72 

Conversion of Cornelius, 75 

Conversion, a Process, 77 

Regeneration, 79 

Justification, 81 

Sanctification, 82 

The Cleansing Blood, 84 

Going On to Perfection, 85 

A Life of Faithfulness, 87 

The Church, the Called Out, 88 

Local Churches and Cooperation, 89 

The Congregation and Her Work, 91 

The Church and Her Officers, . • 93 

The Church, — Her Name, 95 


A Separate People 96 

The Lord's Day, 98 

The First Day of the Week, 100 

Some Ordinances, 101 

The Last Night, 102 

The Upper Room, 104 

The Rite of Feet-washing, 105 

The Lord's Supper, 108 

The Loaf and the Cup, Ill 

An Evening Service, 113 

Before the Passover, 115 

Feet-washing in History, 118 

History and the Lord's Supper, 121 

Close Communion, 124 

Obeying from the Heart, 126 

Where the Merit Comes In, 129 

The Christian Greeting, 131 

Nonconformity, • 133 

Modest Attire, 135 

Principles and Methods, 138 

Holy Men and Women in Prayer, 142 

War Not Christianity, 144 

Oath-bound Societies, 147 

Must Not Swear, 149 

Going to Law, 151 

The Anointing Service, 153 

The Temperate Life, 154 

The Clean Life, 157 

Our Habits, 159 

Worldly Amusements, 161 

Evil Speaking, 163 



Honesty in Business, 165 

The Golden Rule, 166 

Holiness, 167 

Marriage and Divorce, 168 

Christian Giving, 170 

A Life of Service, 173 

Death Not the End, 175 

The State of the Dead, 177 

The Second Coming of Christ, 178 

The Resurrection, 181 

Christ's Personal Reign, 183 

The Final Judgment, * • • 185 

The Destiny of the Wicked, 187 

The Home of the Righteous, 189 





Is There a God? 

Is there a God? Why ask the question? Can 
any one doubt the existence of a Supreme Being? 
On every hand we are confronted with positive 
evidences of his existence and power. What are 
we to understand by the earth, sun, moon and all 
the stars? What are we to understand by the 
planets of our solar system, that revolve about the 
sun with absolute regularity? Well may it be said: 
" The heavens declare the glory of God." The 
solar system alone proves the existence of an Over- 
ruling and Intelligent Mind. Everything we be- 
hold works with the utmost precision, — an accuracy 
unknown in any device of man. A planet, in its 
course around the sun, varies not a second in a 
thousand years. The heavenly bodies most assured- 
ly show the handiwork of God. Indeed, can any 
thinking man look up at the starry heavens, behold 
the movements of the celestial orbs, and yet doubt 
the existence of a God? Then think of man, — his 
intelligence, his aspirations and the yearnings of his 
heart. The best and the noblest there is in man 
cries out after a being greater than himself. The 

I l mx..' MA.;.trvAL 


'%W f W>^ 


idea of a God is innate with man. It is a very part 
of him. He can not get away from the thought. 
Yea, there is a God. This is the verdict of the best 
minds the world has ever produced. One of the 
wisest of men once said : " The fool hath said in 
his heart, There is no God." So, after all, only fools 
say, " There is no God." 

The Creator of All Things. 

There is a God. He made the earth and all things 
that dwell therein. He made the sun, moon, and all 
the stars. The universe is not a work of chance. 
This world did not come into existence by chance. 
Everything about it goes to show that it was cre- 
ated, — brought into existence and prepared for 
living beings from the lowest to the highest type. 
Everything around us goes to show that the earth 
was made for man, and that man was made for the 
earth. The condition of one fits into the demands 
of the other most thoroughly. We might as well 
think of the incongruity of a commodious dwelling, 
with all the conveniences of a lovely home, without 
a tenant, as to think of this earth, with its adapta- 
tion for man, and yet without an inhabitant. All 
has been planned and worked out by an intelligent, 
loving and all-powerful Being, and that Being is 
God, our Creator and Father. 

His Fatherly Care. 

God not only made all things, but he looks after 
the works of his hands with a fatherly care, and 
reduces everything to a working system which, for 


harmony and precision, baffles the comprehension 
of man. In the great, boundless universe, with its 
thousands of stupendous bodies, all set in order, 
constantly in motion, there is not a hitch. The 
Lord directs the workings of every part of his 
vast machinery with a skill unknown to the most 
advanced intellects of earth. Then, too, he has so 
nicely adjusted the conditions of the earth, to the 
needs of man, as to impress every thinking person 
with the thought of his loving and fatherly care of 
his children. Who can look out upon the starry 
heavens, and then look at the earth, with all of its 
adaptations for man, and say that ours is not a 
wise, kind, loving, merciful and just Father? 

Man, the Highest Type. 

Contrasting man with the works of God's hands, 
as displayed in the heavenly bodies, the Psalmist 
says : " What is man, that thou art mindful of him ? 
. . . For thou hast made him a little lower than 
the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and 
honor" (Psa. 8: 4, 5). There are three orders of 
intelligence. First, the Deity. To this order be- 
longs the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. 
They have the supervision over the entire universe 
and direct every movement. Second, the angels. 
These are God's celestial messengers, and there 
may be millions of them. In their work they are 
not limited by space or conditions, but can be sent 
to any part of God's domain. Third, comes man, 
made a little lower than the angels, and also created 
to serve God's purpose on earth. In his famous ad- 


dress on Mars' Hill, Paul referred to man as " the 
offspring of God " (Acts 17: 29). Well may man 
be recognized as the crowning piece of God's work, 
the highest type of creation, made in the likeness 
and image of God, and capable of the highest order 
of soul and intellectual culture. Since man occu- 
pies a position just a little lower than the angels, 
since he is the offspring of God, and made in the 
likeness and image of the Deity, it is no wonder 
that the great Father should be so thoroughly inter- 
ested in his welfare and destiny. 

God's Revelation to Man. 

Considering the relation that man sustains to his 
Maker, and his marvelous possibilities, it is incon- 
ceivable that he should have been left without some 
kind of a revelation, to guide him in his search after 
spiritual light and the better way of living. After 
making man in his own likeness and image, God 
would no more think of leaving him to grope his 
way in darkness, than a kind and loving earthly 
father would think of leaving his helpless child 
without food or clothing. For his temporal aid, 
God has given man the light of the sun, nourish- 
ment for his craving appetite, and material from 
which to make clothing for his bodily comfort. 
Without a revelation to supply the yearnings of his 
soul, the work of the Creator would be incomplete. 
We can not think of such a neglect, and it is but 
proper that we should look about us for a revelation 
that bears the stamp of the Divine. 


The Bible, God's Revelation. 

The Bible not only supplies the spiritual crav- 
ings of man, but it bears upon its face the unmis- 
takable evidence of an Inspired Volume. It is 
made up of sixty-six books, written by half as many 
men, who lived at different periods of the world's 
history, and in different parts of the earth. They 
wrote at widely different times, under different 
circumstances, and for different purposes. From 
the time the first book of the Old Testament was 
commenced, until the last book of the New Testa- 
ment was completed, nearly sixteen hundred years 
rolled by. These different authors were men of 
various occupations and attainments. Among them 
were kings, prophets, judges, scribes, shepherds, 
military officers, court officials, poets, taxgatherers, 
college graduates, fishermen and physicians. Some 
were men of polished literary attainments, while 
others were favored with only an ordinary educa- 
tion. As each man wrote, he was guided by the 
Holy Ghost; and so the Bible comes down to us 
with the Holy Spirit and God behind it. We need 
not offer special evidence in support of its Divine 
Authenticity. What it is accomplishing in the con- 
version of men and women, and in making the 
world better, to say nothing of its perfect adapta- 
tion to the needs of man, is ample proof of its claims 
as the Revealed Will of the Most High. As has 
well been said : 

"This Book contains the mind of God, the state 
of man, the way of salvation, the doom of sinners 


and the happiness of believers. Its doctrines are 
holy, its precepts are binding, its histories are true, 
and its decisions are immutable. Read it to be wise, 
believe it to be safe, and practice it to be holy. It 
contains light to direct you, food to support you and 
comfort to cheer you. It is the travelers map, the 
pilgrim's staff, the pilot's compass, the soldier's 
sword, and the Christian's charter. Here Paradise 
is restored, heaven opened, and the gates of hell dis- 
closed. Christ is its grand object, our good its de- 
sign, and the glory of God its end. It should fill the 
memory, rule the heart and guide the feet. Read it 
slowly, frequently and prayerfully. It is a mine of 
wealth, a Paradise of glory and a river of pleasure. 
It is given you in life, will be opened in the judg- 
ment, and will be remembered forever. It involves 
the highest responsibility, will reward the greatest 
labor, and will condemn all who trifle with its sacred 

The Old Testament. 

The Bible is divided into two general divisions, — 
the Old Testament and the New Testament. The 
former, beginning with Genesis and closing with 
Malachi, covers the whole period of the world's his- 
tory from the creation to within about 400 years of 
Christ. For centuries it has been held that the 
first five books of the Old Testament, with the ex- 
ception of the closing chapter of Deuteronomy, were 
written by Moses, or at least prepared under his 
instruction. In fact, Christ, who knew what he was 
talking about, repeatedly refers to Moses as the 


author of the books containing the law, or the 
Pentateuch, as these five books are commonly 
called. (See Luke 24: 44 and John 5: 46, 47.) In 
Mark 12 : 26 Jesus calls Exodus " the book of 
Moses." In the time of Christ the Old Testament 
was divided into three parts, — the Law, the Proph- 
ets, and the Psalms. The authorship of the law 
was ascribed to Moses, while the other parts were 
assigned to a number of authors; but all of the 
books, constituting the collection, were looked upon 
as inspired. 

The Old Testament gives an account of God's 
dealings with his people during the Old Dispensa- 
tion, and served its purpose as God's revelation to 
man for this period. Its teachings were more es- 
pecially adapted to Israel as a nation, and were 
meant to prepare a people for a more advanced rev- 
elation. Hence Paul says that " the law was our 
schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ " (Gal. 3: 24). 
In the next verse we are told that " after that faith 
is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster." 
In preparing a people, and leading them up to 
Christ, to the higher plane, the law has been ful- 
filled; that is, it has served its purpose. Or, as Je- 
sus once said : " The law and the prophets were 
until John" (Luke 16: 16), therefore we are no 
longer under the law of Moses. The law, with its 
rites and ceremonies, has passed away, having been 
disannulled. Like an old institution, it has given 
place to a better covenant, and one " established on 
better promises" (Heb. 8: 6). And since the Old 
Testament can not be regarded as our rule of faith 


and practice, we must naturally look to the New 

The New Testament. 

The New Testament Canon, as we now have it, 
has practically existed since the close of the apos- 
tolic age. At different times the genuineness of 
some of the books was questioned, but before the 
Council of Nice, A. D. 325, the list had been quite 
generally agreed upon, though the council took up 
the books, one by one, and confirmed the existing 

The New Testament is composed of twenty-seven 
books, the production of at least eight authors, and 
is intended solely for the new dispensation. In the 
Gospels we have a history of Christ, a record of his 
teachings and an account of the establishing of his 
church. The Acts follow with an account of what 
was done by some of the apostles and others, under 
the guidance of the Holy Ghost. Here we find a 
number of conversions, in which the process of 
conversion is clearly set forth. The epistles were 
addressed to saints, and have much to say as to how 
the converted should live. The canon closes with 
the Book of Revelation, dealing largely with the 
future, and pointing out clearly the destiny of the 
righteous, as well as that of the disobedient. 

While the Old Testament belongs to the old dis- 
pensation, and was intended for the people of that 
dispensation, the New Testament pertains to the 
new dispensation, and is fully adapted to the needs 
and purposes of the present age. Here we find the 


will of God, as intended for every age and nation. 
It was prepared by holy men, who wrote as they 
were moved by the Holy Spirit, and therefore the 
book properly becomes the rule of faith and prac- 
tice for all the faithful who accept Christ as their 
Teacher and Savior. It now becomes our duty to 
examine this Book and see what it demands of all 
the faithful followers of Christ. 

John Introducing Christ. 

The work of the New Dispensation was begun 
by John the Baptist, the forerunner of Christ. His 
preaching, as Mark puts it, was " the beginning of the 
Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God " (Mark 1 : 
1). It is further stated, as cited before, that "the 
law and the prophets were until John : since then the 
kingdom of God is preached" (Luke 16: 16). We 
read : " There was a man sent from God, whose 
name was John" (John 1:6). So he was selected 
by God for a special purpose and, during his brief 
ministry, performed his mission, which was to pre- 
pare a people for Christ. He delivered the message 
received of God, and in this way prepared a people 
by making known to them the mission with which 
he had been entrusted. He magnified not himself, 
but the Christ, who was to follow. 

He was entrusted with a baptism that was from 
heaven (Matt. 21: 25), and to the thousands who 
received his teachings regarding Jesus, he adminis- 
tered the rite of baptism. In the midst of his re- 
markable career, and while baptizing in the river 
Jordan, Jesus, who was then about thirty years old, 


came forward and demanded baptism. At first John 
hesitated, feeling that he was hardly worthy to bap- 
tize One whom he regarded as his superior. But 
being fully convinced, by what was said on the oc- 
casion, that this was a part of his mission, he led 
Jesus into the sacred stream and baptized him, 
employing the form of baptism that he had received 
from heaven, and the form observed in the baptism 
of the thousands who had so willingly accepted his 
teachings. At Christ's baptism, God proclaimed 
him as his beloved Son, thus settling the question 
with John, and others having spiritual insight, that 
he was indeed the long-promised Messiah, — the One 
of whom Moses and the prophets had written. 

Christ the Head. 

Referring to the confession made by Peter, Je- 
sus said : " Upon this rock I will build my church " 
(Matt. 16: 18). To this church belong all true be- 
lievers who love Jesus, confess his name and obey 
his commandments. He is the Head and the Law- 
giver by divine appointment. To him all saints are 
directly related, and thereby become and constitute 
the body of Christ upon the earth. The word 
" church," primarily, means " the called out." Jesus, 
through his Word, through his faithful teachers, 
and by the help of the Holy Spirit, calls upon men 
and women everywhere to forsake their sins, come 
out from the world and to lay hold on eternal life. 
Those who, in faith, heed the call, make up the 
membership of the New Testament church. 

In Col. 1: 18 we read: "And he is the head of 


the body, the church." Paul told the elders at 
Ephesus to feed the flock of God, which Jesus has 
purchased with his own blood (Acts 20: 28). The 
church belongs to Jesus, was founded by him, and 
even purchased with his own blood. By his labors, 
John the Baptist prepared members for this body, 
and as they left all, and attached themselves to 
Christ, they became members of his body, — sub- 
jects of his kingdom on earth. This mystical body 
of Christ has never been formally organized. As 
disciples accepted Jesus in faith and obedience, they 
became a part of his called-out, — the church, — and 
at the head he stands as the Savior, the Purchaser, 
and the Law-giver. However, for convenience, lo- 
cal churches have been organized, and, by virtue of 
New Testament recognition, they became parts of 
the body of which Jesus is the Divinely-appointed 
Head. These local churches, or congregations, with 
their officers, are authorized to do all that the Gos- 
pel requires of churches, and may combine to labor 
together for more extended work in the interest of 
the kingdom. 

Our Creed. 

In carrying forward the work the Master has en- 
trusted to his people, the church that is wise as well 
as loyal, will accept the New Testament for her 
creed. Here will be found a rule of faith and prac- 
tice that is backed up by Divine Authority, and is 
perfectly adapted to the conditions and needs of the 
church in every age and country. Here will be 
found the principles or fundamentals of the Chris- 


tian religion clearly stated. The duties, privileges 
and responsibilties are pointed out, and it is the 
duty of the church to adopt, from time to time, 
the wisest possible methods for carrying out these 
principles. In some respects, wisdom may dictate 
some changes in methods, but the principles, being 
divine, never change. 

It is highly important that we do not confuse 
principles and methods, and that we do not attempt 
to elevate local and temporary methods to the dig- 
nity of principles. And while this is true, such 
methods of carrying on the Lord's work, as are set 
forth in the Scriptures, should be duly and sacredly 
respected. The New Testament, as the creed of the 
New Testament church, delegates, to any well-or- 
ganized church of Jesus Christ, authority to teach 
and properly enforce all the requirements and de- 
mands of the Gospel; and, guided by wisdom and 
love for souls, along with a sacred regard for the 
purity and dignity of the church, no congregation 
can afford to tolerate in her ranks deliberate de- 
partures from the plain duties enjoined upon the 
members of the body of Christ. The teachings of 
the New Testament are intended for the govern- 
ment of the church, and those in charge of the Mas- 
ter's interest should see to it that they are respected. 

He Came to Save Sinners. 

The whole purpose of Jesus' mission may be 
summed up in this one statement: "For the Son 
of man is come to seek and to save that which was 
lost" (Luke 19: 10). Then it is said in John 3: 16 


that " God so loved the world, that he gave his only 
begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him 
should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 
the Baptist recognized this fact most clearly when 
he once said, pointing to Jesus : " Behold the Lamb 
of God, which taketh away the sin of the world " 
(John 1 : 29) ! Jesus found man in the lowest 
depths of sin, and came to earth, and endured all the 
hardships and privations that were meted out to 
him, in order that he might save the sinner from 
his sins, as well as to protect him from sinning. 
Nothing but love of the highest type prompted him 
to carry out the mission of salvation entrusted to 
him. His mission was to serve and to save, and the 
plan he followed, in the scheme of human redemp- 
tion, as we are here setting forth, step by step, 
shows clearly how the system was outlined in the 
mind of the Father, as well as in the mind of the 

Love and Obedience. 

Love and obedience are two great cardinal points 
in the plan of salvation. Jesus says, " If a man love 
me, he will keep my words" (John 14: 23). Noth- 
ing could be plainer. The real test of love is obe- 
dience. This will be found true in every depart- 
ment of life. The child who loves her mother will 
obey her. But hear the Master further: " He that 
hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it 
is that loveth me " (John 14: 21). Then, who is it 
that loves Jesus? There can be but one answer: 
" He that hath my commandments, and keepeth 
them " 


Every man who has the New Testament has the 
commandments of Christ, and if he deliberately re- 
fuses to obey them from the heart, it can not be 
truthfully said that he loves his Lord. In the light 
of what we here say, it must be evident to every 
reader that love and obedience go hand in hand. 
Where love for the Master exists, there will obe- 
dience be found. The absence of obedience indi- 
cates the absence of love. This is the plain declara- 
tion of the Master himself. Hear him again : " He 
that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings " (John 
14: 24). We also have this further statement: 
" For this is the love of God, that we keep his 
commandments" (1 John 5:3). Love and obedi- 
ence are found in the same heart. True obedience 
can not be separated from love. In fact, true love 
invariably prompts obedience. 

Offers Eternal Life. 

Jesus not only saves us from our sins, but he 
offers eternal life to all those who believe on him. 
Hear this statement : " He that believeth on me 
hath eternal life " (John 6 : 47) . Another statement : 
" He that heareth my word, and believeth on him 
that sent me, hath everlasting life" (John 5: 24). 
At this point we may again quote John 3 : 16 : " For 
God so loved the world, that he gave his only be- 
gotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should 
not perish, but have everlasting life." Here we 
have salvation from sin, and the promise of life 
eternal as well. No greater gift could be offered to 
man, for nothing is so desirable, and so highly val- 


ued as life, and especially is this true as it applies to 
the life that is beyond, — the life of the future, — 
everlasting life. This is what Jesus offers to every 
man and woman of the race, who will, in faith and 
obedience, to accept him as their Savior. 

Preaching the Word. 

Just before taking his departure from earth, Je- 
sus told his disciples to " go into all the world and 
preach the Gospel to every creature " (Mark 16: 15). 
But why preach the Gospel? Because " it pleased 
God by the foolishness of preaching to save them 
that believe " (1 Cor. 1 : 21). Paul, in Rom. 10: 14, 
asks concerning those who would hear, believe and 
be saved : " How shall they hear without a preach- 
er?" Jesus went about the country, not only heal- 
ing the sick, but preaching the Gospel of the king- 
dom. He sent out the twelve, and later the seventy, 
to spread the news of the kingdom to the lost sheep 
of the house of Israel. Philip, some time after the 
ascension, went to Samaria and preached the Gos- 
pel (Acts 8:5). He also preached to the Ethiopian 
eunuch (Acts 8: 35). And we read of others who 
went forth, preaching the Gospel, and in this way 
the foundation for congregations was laid in the 
hearts of the people. The preaching of the Gospel 
led to faith in the things preached, and faith led to 
obedience and salvation. So it will be seen how 
God, by the foolishness of preaching, can save those 
who believe. 


Hearing the Word. 

Paul, in Rom. 10 : 14, already cited in part, reasons 
thus : " How then shall they call on him in whom 
they have not believed? and how shall they believe 
in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall 
they hear without a preacher?" Without preach- 
ing there is no hearing, without hearing there is no 
believing, and without believing there can be no 
salvation. Hearing is one of the essential acts in 
conversion. Jesus says : " Whosoever heareth 
these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken 
him unto a wise man, which built his house upon 
a rock" (Matt. 7: 24). In this instance the Master 
adds doing to hearing as one of the necessary ele- 
ments in making the spiritual life a success. There 
are those who hear, and yet they hear not, for the 
reason that they do not receive, into honest and 
good hearts, the truths that are presented to them. 

Explaining the parable of the sower, who sowed 
good seed on different kinds of ground, Jesus says : 
" The seed is the word of God " (Luke 8: 11). The 
man who preaches the Gospel is sowing the seed 
of the kingdom, — the Word of God, — in the hearts 
of the children of men. To receive this Word into 
honest hearts, is to both hear and heed that which 
is taught. It then becomes a matter of both hearing 
and obeying. Or, as James puts it, " receive with 
meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save 
your souls" (James 1: 21). He then adds: "But 
be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only " 
(verse 22). In verse eighteen he says we have been 


begotten " with the word of truth." It will thus be 
observed that the Word of Truth, which is the 
"sword of the Spirit" (Eph. 6: 17), is an indis- 
pensable factor in the process of conversion. 

Faith, What It Is, and What It Does. 

In a cold, stiff way faith is defined as the belief of 
testimony, or the confidence placed in testimony. It 
is understood, of course, that in the New Testament 
the terms " faith," " belief," and " believing " refer 
to the same thing. Faith means belief, and belief 
means faith. Paul would define faith as being " the 
substance " or ground " of things hoped for, the 
evidence of things not seen " (Heb. 11 : 1). This is 
philosophy, and is as good a definition as could be 
given, but it is not so easily understood. We view 
the subject from another angle. Faith is an indefin- 
able quality of the mind and soul,— one that prompts 
action and causes people to do things. Faith is 
something that comes. Paul, in Rom. 10: 17, says 
it comes by hearing the Word of God. It is a prod- 
uct, — produced by the Word. Not only so, but men 
believe with the heart. It is, then, a heart work. 
Or, to make it a little plainer, faith is the product 
of the Word of God in the heart. 

The Word enters the heart by hearing. It may 
also enter by reading. We are told that the Lord 
opened Lydia's heart, and that " she attended unto 
the things which were spoken of Paul " (Acts 16 : 
14). Her heart was opened by the Word, which is 
declared to be "the sword of the Spirit" (Eph. 6: 
17). It is the instrument the Spirit employs to 


reach the heart. When the heart is once reached 
with the Word of God, accompanied by the influence 
of the Spirit, we have faith. 

Faith is that indefinable something that produces 
action. Men who have faith, act. They will do 
something, — something that is prompted by faith. 
It is this condition of the mind that made Abraham 
willing to offer his son Isaac as a burnt offering. It 
led Noah to build the ark, and also made it possible 
for the three Hebrew children to pass through the 
fiery furnace. It is the something that prompts the 
best people in the world to do things. 

It is the great influence in the heart that leads to 
repentance and obedience. The 3,000 converts on 
the Day of Pentecost had faith, and that is why they 
so readily consented to do what Peter required of 
them. It was this believing with the heart that 
led to every instance of obedience and faithfulness 
mentioned in the Scriptures. Men and women who 
have faith, obey. They show their faith by their 
actions. And so James proposed to show his faith 
by his works (James 2: 18). There is no other way 
of showing or demonstrating faith. 

We judge of faith like we judge of love. People 
who love, show their love by kind acts, and in the 
absence of some manifestations of love, we logically 
conclude that there is also an absence of love. In 
cold terms, we may measurably define love, but 
there is no definition so easily understood, by both 
the learned and the unlearned, as loving deeds. 
There is no question about the loving disposition 
of people who abound in good works. What they 
do is accepted the world over as proof of their love. 


Just so with faith. Some people may not under- 
stand the definition of faith, as given in dictionaries ; 
they may not understand Paul's philosophical meth- 
od of defining faith, but they never fail to under- 
stand the manifestations of faith. When they see 
the 3,000 converts doing what Peter told them to do, 
they fully comprehend that kind of a definition. 
The most ignorant of men and women can under- 
stand definitions of this character. And, in fact, 
there is no way of defining faith so clearly as by re- 
ducing it to acts. Show faith by acts, and the ques- 
tion is settled. Demonstrate faith by works, and 
that will be the end of all controversy. No man 
questions the existence of faith where the evidence 
is given in the acts for which faith calls, but in the 
absence of such evidence it is but natural that we 
should look for the absence of faith, and say that 
without works there can be no faith. One might 
as logically look for love where there are no tokens 
of love, as to look for faith in the absence of the 
acts that demonstrate faith. 

Not by Faith Alone. 

We are told that " without faith it is impossible 
to please God " (Heb. 11:6), and that " he that be- 
lieveth not shall be damned " (Mark 16: 16). Paul 
and Silas said to the jailer: " Believe on the Lord 
Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved " (Acts 16 : 
31). Does it, then, follow that one can be saved by 
faith? Most assuredly. The New Testament 
teaches that the man who possesses the right kind of 
faith, has saving faith. Saving faith, however, is 


the faith taught by Jesus, and affirmed by the apos- 
tles. We dare not say " faith alone," for the faith 
endorsed by the Word of God is never alone. It is 
invariably accompanied by the duties for which 
faith calls. The devils had faith, — just that and no 
more. It merely made them tremble, and that is 
about as much as may be said of the faith alone doc- 

Saving faith takes in all that has been enjoined by 
Christ and the apostles. Faith standing alone 
counts for nothing in the process of conversion. 
James says : " Faith, if it hath not works, is dead, 
being alone" (James 2: 17). No one cares know- 
ingly to run the risk of a dead faith, and yet that is 
just what one has when he bases his hope on faith 
alone. Genuine faith leads up to duties, and as we 
advance we shall see what these duties are. God 
can and will save the man who wills to be saved, for 
we read that " whosoever will, let him take the 
water of life freely" (Rev. 22: 17). So it will be 
seen that one's will has a part to play in attaining 
unto eternal life. 


Repentance means a reformation of life. It fur- 
ther means to " cease to do evil ; learn to do well " 
(Isa. 1 : 16, 17). Jesus makes repentance imperative, 
and what he once said, regarding those who were 
killed by the falling of the tower of Siloam, applies 
to all : " Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise per- 
ish " (Luke 13: 5). Furthermore, when the Mas- 
ter sent his apostles into all the world to preach the 


Gospel to every creature, he said unto them that 
" repentance and remission of sins should be 
preached among all nations " (Luke 24: 47). In his 
famous address on Solomon's porch, Peter told the 
people that they should " repent . . . and be 
converted " (Acts 3: 19). He would have them un- 
derstand that repentance was one of the necessary 
steps in the process of conversion. Paul looked up- 
on repentance as an essential part of the Gospel and 
of universal application, for in his address on Mars' 
Hill he said, God " commandeth all men everywhere 
to repent " (Acts 17: 30). 

This doctrine, as one of the divinely-appointed 
conditions of pardon, was urged by Peter on the 
Day of Pentecost. To those inquiring after the 
way of salvation he said : " Repent, and be baptized 
every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for 
the remission of sins" (Acts 2: 38). If, what 
Peter says, be true, — and it is, for he spake as he 
was guided by the Spirit, — it follows that without 
repentance there can be no salvation from sin. The 
man who would be saved must not only believe in 
the Lord Jesus, but he must repent. There must 
be a godly sorrow for sin, a turning away from a 
life of sin, to be followed by a life of faithfulness. 
It is not sufficient to cease doing evil. There must 
be fruits meet for repentance, and this means obe- 
dience, or going forward in the line of duty. 


Hearing leads to believing, believing to repent- 
ance, and repentance leads to confession. To con- 
fess Christ is to acknowledge his sovereignty and to 


accept his teachings. Jesus says, in Matt. 10: 32, 
" Whosoever, therefore, shall confess me before 
men, him will I confess also before my Father 
which is in heaven. " Paul makes confession a con- 
dition of salvation. Here is his statement: "That 
if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Je- 
sus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath 
raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For 
with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, 
and with the mouth confession is made unto salva- 
tion " (Rom. 10: 9, 10). Before the eunuch was 
baptized, he made his confession in these words: 
" I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God " 
(Acts 8: 37). 

The confession, however, embraces more than 
merely accepting Christ. It includes a confession 
for sins. In 1 John 1 : 9 we read : " If we confess 
our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our 
sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 
Even John the Baptist, though working in the twi- 
light of the Gospel, taught the doctrine of confes- 
sion, for when the people, from all the regions 
round about, came to him, it is said that they " were 
baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins " 
(Matt. 3:6). It is remarkable, when we come to 
consider the matter carefully, how faith, repentance 
and confession are related, as so many steps, lead- 
ing up to salvation from our sins. In these steps 
the hand of God is pointing out the way. 

Baptism a Necessity. 

There should be no question about the necessity 
of the rite of baptism. When Jesus sent forth his 


apostles to teach or disciple all nations, he directed 
that penitent believers should be baptized " into 
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
Holy Ghost" (Matt. 28: 19). He also declared, 
" He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved " 
(Mark 16: 16). Speaking as he was moved by the 
Holy Ghost, Peter told those inquiring after their 
duty to " repent and be baptized every one of you " 
(Acts 2: 38). 

While listening to the preaching of Philip, the 
eunuch became so impressed that he even requested 
baptism. He was then told that if he believed he 
might receive the rite. Having made the confes- 
sion, we learn that he was baptized (Acts 8: 36-38). 
As fast as the Samaritans believed the preaching of 
Philip, they were baptized (Acts 8: 12). Even 
Cornelius, a devout man, one who feared God and 
prayed to God alway, submitted to the rite of New 
Testament baptism (Acts 10: 48). Though a cho- 
sen vessel, Saul, who in time became the prince 
of Gospel preachers, was instructed by Ananias to 
be baptized (Acts 22: 16). 

In fact, in the time of the apostles no one ever 
dreamed of accepting Christ as his Savior without 
submitting to baptism. Jesus, the Head of the 
church, had set the example by receiving baptism 
at the hands of John, his forerunner (Matt. 3: 13- 
16). The apostles also were baptized, and every 
man, engaged in preaching the Gospel, seems to 
have had something to say about baptism. The 
necessity of the rite was unchallenged, and wher- 
ever Christianity was introduced, Christian baptism 
became a recognized necessity. 


Baptism for Believers Only. 

In the great commission Jesus places faith, or 
belief, alongside of baptism. To his apostles, who 
were instructed to preach the Gospel to every crea- 
ture, he said : " He that believeth and is baptized 
shall be saved" (Mark 16: 16). In their preaching 
the apostles were to do their utmost to reach every 
creature with their message, but their instruction 
limited them to believers in the administering of 
baptism. In their work they met two classes who 
could not be considered subjects for baptism, — 
those who would not exercise faith, and those who 
could not. To the latter class belonged the chil- 
dren, not capable of understanding. Even in the 
cases of whole households, only those of the family, 
capable of hearing and believing the Word, were 

It is said that at the home of Cornelius " the Holy 
Ghost fell on all them which heard the Word " 
(Acts 10: 44). This did not include infants, for the 
reason that they are not capable of hearing the 
Word ; that is, accepting it understandingly. Then, 
from the two closing verses of this chapter, we 
learn that baptism was administered to those who 
had received the Holy Ghost. This shows that no 
infants were among the number who received the 
rite. In Acts 16 : 33, 34 we have an account of the 
conversion of the jailer and his household. But in 
this instance we are told that the jailer believed in 
God with all his house " ; or, as the Revised Version 
has it : " With all his house, having believed m 


God." Since all in the household were capable of 
exercising faith, it follows that infants did not 
figure in the case. 

And so we might reason regarding all the house- 
holds in which mention is made of baptism. There 
is not an instance where the rite was administered 
to any one not old enough to choose for himself. 
By virtue of the atonement, all infants are saved, 
and therefore need no baptism. The age of bap- 
tism comes when young people have sufficient un- 
derstanding to exercise faith, make the good con- 
fession and demand the rite. As regards children, 
in their innocent state, the Master says : " Of such 
is the kingdom of heaven " (Matt. 19: 14), and this, 
too, without either faith or baptism. 

Baptism, the Purpose. 

Baptism is a New Testament institution for all 
penitent believers seeking salvation. It is an act 
of obedience, through which one enters Christ, for 
Paul says that " so many of us as were baptized 
into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death " 
(Rom. 6:3). This makes it clear that the penitent 
believer gets into Christ by being baptized into him. 
The same principle is affirmed in Gal. 3: 27, where 
we read : " For as many of you as have been bap- 
tized into Christ have put on Christ." 

From this we may learn that baptism is the 
visible, initiatory rite of the church. It is not the 
sign of the initiation but the initiation ceremony 
itself. It is not the outward sign of an inward 
initiation, but the visible act of the initiation. In 


fact, it is the outward part of the initiation process. 
In this process there is an outward as well as an 
inward part, and baptism has been made the out- 
ward part. It is not an outward sign that the in- 
ward change of being born again has already taken 
place, but it is the external part of the act. Bap- 
tism may be an evidence of the inward change, 
made necessary for an entrance into the kingdom, 
but can not be a sign of an entrance that has al- 
ready taken place. The work of grace in the heart, 
— faith, repentance, confession, regeneration and 
baptism, — may be regarded as parts of the process 
that makes one a new creature in Christ Jesus. They 
are parts of the process that consummates true 
conversion. In this process baptism is the visible 
part, and belongs to the process, as much so as faith 
or repentance. We have no more right to eliminate 
baptism than we have to exclude any other part of 
the divine process. 

Baptism is not only the divinely-appointed ini- 
tiatory rite of the church, but Peter, when instruct- 
ing the penitent believers on the Day of Pentecost, 
gave them to understand that the rite, when pre- 
ceded by faith and repentance, is " for the remission 
of sins" (Acts 2: 38). Saul, having shown evidence 
of faith and repentance, was told by Ananias to 
" arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins " 
(Acts 22: 16). These two citations show clearly 
that the initiatory rite figured in the remission of 
sins, not because there is merit in the service, but 
because God demands it, and promises a blessing 
on condition of its performance. 


Immersion, the Mode. 

The mode of baptism, as set forth in the New 
Testament, ought not to be difficult to determine. 
The people to whom John the Baptist preached, un- 
derstood what was meant when baptism was men- 
tioned. When Jesus told his apostles to teach or 
disciple all nations, " baptizing them into the name 
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
Ghost" (Matt. 28: 19), they understood just what 
was meant by the word baptise. There was no con- 
troversy about the meaning of the word in those 
days, and there ought to be none now. 

The books composing the New Testament were 
originally written in the Greek, and the Sacred 
Volume has come down to us in that language. 
Now, in order to ascertain what mode was taught 
by Jesus, and practiced by the apostles, it is only 
necessary to note what Greek word was used to 
designate the rite, and then to ascertain the mean- 
ing of that particular word. 

There are three words to be considered, and each 
one has a specific meaning. There is rantizo, to 
sprinkle; and ekcheo, to pour out. On examining 
the great commission (Matt. 28: 19), we find that 
the Master made use of neither of these words. Not 
only so, but there is not an instance in the entire 
New Testament, relating to baptism, where either 
rantizo or ekcheo is employed in describing the act. 
Had those who wrote the New Testament under- 
stood that Jesus taught sprinkling in his commis- 
sion, it would have been easy enough for them to 


write the word rantizo. Had this been done, then 
everybody would know, as a matter of certainty, 
that the Mastei meant to teach sprinkling. But 
since they did not use the word rantizo, meaning 
sprinkling, it follows that there is no ground what- 
ever for sprinkling in the commission. The same 
course of reasoning disposes of ekcheo, to pour out. 
In the New Testament there is no authority, what- 
ever, for pouring as baptism. 

There remains one more word to examine; viz., 
baptizo, and this is the very word found in the 
commission. Furthermore, it is the word employed, 
in some of its forms, to describe the act in every 
instance where baptism is mentioned in the New 
Testament, save in the few instances where bap- 
tism is compared to a washing. Its meaning may 
easily be determined by its use in the Old Testa- 
ment. We cite the instance regarding Naaman, 
where we read : " Then went he down and dipped 
himself seven times in Jordan" (2 Kings 5: 14). 
Baptizo is the word employed in the Greek text, 
and is here very properly rendered dipped. The 
meaning of the word is to dip or to immerse, and is 
so rendered in every Greek Lexicon of note in the 
world. There is not a Greek scholar of reputation 
who would venture to render baptizo by either 
sprinkling or pouring. 

The Meaning of Baptizo. 

Did space permit, we might quote from scores of 
lexicons and encyclopedias, showing that the Greek 
word baptizo, the word employed by the New 


Testament writers to describe baptism, means " to 
dip," " to immerse," or " to immerge " in some man- 
ner, but in this connection we present a few only. 

Bretschneider. — " Baptizo: properly, to dip re- 
peatedly; ... to immerse into water, to sub- 

Donnegan. — "Baptizo: to immerse repeatedly in- 
to a liquid; to submerge, to sink." 

Greenfield. — "Baptizo: to immerse, immerge, sub- 
merge, sink." 

Grimm. — "Baptizo: to dip repeatedly, to immerge, 

Liddell and Scott. — "Baptizo: to dip in or under 

Stockius. — "Baptizo: generally and by force of 
the word it has the notion of dipping in and of im- 

Thayer. — Baptizo: "to dip repeatedly, to immerge, 

To the above we may add the testimony of Prof. 
Chas. Anthon, a man of fine scholarship, well ac- 
quainted with the ancient languages, and the author 
of a number of books, including Greek and Latin 
textbooks for colleges and universities. Being 
asked the meaning of the Greek word baptizo, he 
gave this answer: "The primary meaning of the 
word is to dip or immerse, and its secondary mean- 
ings, if it ever had any, all refer, in some way or 
other, to the same leading idea. Sprinkling, etc., 
are entirely out of the question." Prof. Anthon 
does not differ from other distinguished scholars, 
for all of them, as stated before, are united in de- 
fining the word as here given. 


But there is another very simple way of getting 
at the exact meaning of baptizo, and this is to study 
the meaning of the word in connection with the 
instances where baptism is described in the New 
Testament. In Matt. 3 : 5, 6 we read that the people 
of Jerusalem, all Judea and the region round about, 
on accepting the teachings of John the Baptist, 
" were baptized of him in Jordan." In the same 
chapter (verses 13-17) we are told how Jesus came 
from Galilee to John, and was baptized of him, and 
then " went up straightway out of the water." 
This can mean nothing short of immersion, for 
those who have the water sprinkled or poured on 
them do not have to come up out of the water. The 
mere fact that Jesus came up out of the water is 
positive proof that he was immersed. 

In Acts 8: 36-39 we have an account of baptism 
that is too plain to be misunderstood. We read 
that Philip and the eunuch " came unto a certain 
water." Then, the record says, after the chariot 
had stopped, " They went down both into the water, 
both Philip and the eunuch." After they got into 
the water, it is said that Philip baptized the eunuch. 
Surely, the baptizing was done in the water, for 
that is why the two went down into the water. In 
the closing part of the narrative we read: "And 
when they were come up out of the water." If this 
plain account of the baptismal scene does not mean 
immersion, then it means nothing. A narrative in 
favor of immersion could not be made plainer. 

All the accounts of baptism in the New Testa- 
ment might be taken up and shown to be on the 


side of immersion, but we will let one more suffice. 
Turning to John 3: 23, we have this reading: "And 
John also was baptizing in JEnon near to Salim, be- 
cause there was much water there: and they came 
and were baptized." For baptism, John sought out 
places where there was much water. People flocked 
to him by the hundreds, and as he immersed those 
who accepted his teachings, much water became a 
necessity. If sprinkling or pouring had been the 
rule, there would have been no occasion for " much 

For the information of those who care to make 
use of a very interesting way of ascertaining the 
meaning of the Greek word baptizo, — the word em- 
ployed by the Savior to describe the rite of baptism, 
we suggest this: In this country may be found 
hundreds of Greeks, whose mother tongue is mod- 
ern Greek. Most of them read the New Testament 
Greek with the same ease we read the English. In 
the presence of some of these Greeks, dip an object 
in water repeatedly, and ask them for the Greek 
word describing the act, and they will invariably 
give baptizo. Then sprinkle water and ask for the 
word expressing that idea, and they will give the 
Greek word for sprinkling. Ask them for the word 
representing pour, and the Greek word for pouring 
will be given. They understand their own lan- 
guage, the language of the New Testament, and 
never become confused about the word baptizo. 
They all say it means to immerse, and with them it 
is not even a debatable question. The Greeks, who 
use the Greek New Testament in their service, al- 
ways have practiced immersion. 


Trine Immersion, the Form* 

We have seen that immersion is the baptism 
taught in the New Testament, and now it is in 
order to consider the form embodied, by the Found- 
er of the church, in the baptismal formula, which 
he gave to his apostles just before he took his de- 
parture from the earth. There is a form for all the 
doctrines taught by Christ, and in Rom. 6: 17 we 
read about obeying " from the heart the form of 
doctrine " delivered unto the saints. It is not only 
the doctrine that must be respected, but the form 
as well. 

The form of baptism is set forth in the baptismal 
formula, as recorded in Matt. 28: 19, reading thus 
in the Revised Version : " Go ye therefore and make 
disciples of all nations, baptizing them into the 
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
Holy Ghost." Since there are three Persons in the 
Trinity, as indicated in the formula, and since each 
one is to be duly honored in the baptismal cere- 
mony, it follows that there should be three actions 
in the performance of the rite, the three actions 
symbolizing the three Persons of the Godhead. If 
there were but one person named in the formula, 
then but one action would be required, but since 
there are three names, and the baptism is to be into 
each name, there must, of necessity, be three ac- 
tions, in order that the demands of the formula may 
be complied with. 

The meaning of the formula is very forcibly pre- 
sented in the following paraphrasing by Alexander 


Campbell : " This is a purely Christian institution ; 
not of Moses or the prophets ; hence the formula is 
a perfectly original and unprecedented institution. 
There had been washings, cleansings and purify- 
ings among the Jews, Samaritans and Gentiles, by 
various authorities and enactments; but not one 
like this: 'Into the name of the Father, and into 
the name of the Son, and into the name of the Holy 
Spirit/ " — American Christian Revision, Vol. X, No. 
39. Also " Quinter and McConnell Debate" page 61. 

To baptize " into the name of the Father, and into 
the name of the Son, and into the name of the Holy 
Spirit," — and this is certainly the meaning of the 
formula, — can mean nothing short of a threefold 
immersion. A careful reading of the formula, as it 
stands in the Revised Version, placing the emphasis 
on the and, where it properly belongs, also brings 
out the idea very clearly, — " Baptizing them into 
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
Holy Ghost." There is probably no better way of 
emphasizing the trine action, which the formula 
was evidently meant to teach. 

In John 19: 19, R. V., will be found a sentence 
very much like the baptismal formula in construc- 
tion, reading thus: "And it [the title] was written 
in Hebrew, and in Latin, and in Greek." That Pi- 
late had to write three times, in order to place the 
title in the three languages named, is self-evident. 
The very construction of the sentence shows this. 
Now, if Pilate had to write three times, in order to 
write the title in Hebrew, and in Latin, and in 
Greek, — and he surely did, — then it certainly follows 
that one must dip his candidate three times, in 


order to baptize him " into the name of the Father, 
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." From this 
conclusion there is no logical escape. 

As the closing paragraph of this chapter, we 
offer the following, which, in the estimation of not 
a few, is looked upon as a clincher : During a pub- 
lic discussion on the form of baptism, one of the dis- 
putants passed a copy of the New Testament to 
the judge of a court, who happened to be present, 
and asked him to write his name in the book of 
Matthew, and of Mark, and of Luke. The Book 
being returned to the speaker, the judge was asked 
how often he had written his name. He answered, 
" Three times." " Then," said the speaker, " if the 
judge could not write his name in the book of 
Matthew, and of Mark, and of Luke, without writ- 
ing three times, pray tell me, how one can bap- 
tize ' into the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the Holy Ghost/ without dipping his candi- 
date three times ? " 

The Ancient Practice. 

The Christians, living in the earlier centuries of 
the Christian era, not only believed that the bap- 
tismal formula taught trine immersion, but that was 
their practice. Speaking of this formula, John 
Chrysostom, born A. D. 347, a very distinguished 
scholar, whose mother tongue was the Greek, says : 
" Christ delivered to his disciples one baptism, in 
three immersions of the body when he said to 
them : ' Go teach all nations, baptizing them in the 
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
Ghost/ " — Bingham. 


Jerome, a man of exceptional scholarship, who 
belonged to the same period, presents, when com- 
menting on Eph. 4 : 5, the same view, regarding the 
three actions of the formula constituting one bap- 
tism. Here are his words: " We are thrice dipped 
in the water, that the mystery of the Trinity may 
appear to be one: . . . though we be thrice 
put under water to represent the mystery of the 
Trinity, yet it is reputed to be but one baptism." — 

In the council at Carthage, North Africa, A. D. 
256, Monulus, a bishop of some note, made a speech 
in which, among other things, he said : " The truth 
of our Mother, the Catholic Church, brethren, hath 
always remained and still remains with us, and even 
especially in the Trinity of baptism, as our Lord sayb. 
Go ye and baptize the nations in the name of the 
Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. ,, — " Writ- 
ings of Cyprian/' Vol. II, page 205. There were 
eighty-seven bishops present when Monulus delivered 
his address, and not one of them challenged the state- 

We introduce one more witness, viz., Tertullian, 
born A. D. 160. He also held that the baptismal for- 
mula enjoins the threefold immersion, for he says: 
" He [Christ] commands them to baptize into the 
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
Ghost, — not into a unipersonal God. And, indeed, it 
is not once only, but three times, that we are im- 
mersed into three persons, at each several mention 
of their names." — " Writings of Tertullian" Vol. HI, 
page 633. 

These quotations not only show what reliable 


ancient authors believed, regarding the meaning of 
the baptismal formula, but they also show what was 
their practice. They believed that Jesus taught trine 
immersion, and in this form they administered the 
rite. And we may add that, among the ancient 
writers who have expressed themselves on the sub- 
ject, there is not one who maintains that Matt. 28: 
19 teaches single immersion. They are all on the 
side of triple immersion. Not only so, but they hold 
that this triple immersion is the one baptism men- 
tioned by Paul in Eph. 4: 5. With them it was " one 
baptism in three immersions of the body." 

Some History. 

We might fill scores of pages with extracts from 
the writings of historians, ancient and modern, show- 
ing that in the early centuries of the Christian era 
trine immersion was the well nigh universal practice 
in all the churches East and West. But since we are 
treating these subjects briefly we shall let a few ex- 
tracts suffice. 

Our first author is Isaac Taylor Hinton, A. M., 
a Baptist historian of acknowledged ability. In his 
" History of Baptism," page 158, he says : " The prac- 
tice of trine immersion prevailed, in the West as well 
as in the East, till the fourth council of Toledo (A. 
D. 633), which, acting under the advice of Gregory 
the Great, in order to settle some disputes which had 
arisen, decreed that henceforth only one immersion 
should be used in baptism; and from that time the 
practice of only one immersion gradually became 
general throughout the Western or Latin Church." 


Dr. Robert Robinson, another Baptist historian, 
and the author of several works, has this to say in 
his " History of Baptism/' page 148 : " It is not true 
that dipping was exchanged for sprinkling by choice 
before the Reformation (A. D. 1517), for, till after 
that period, the ordinary baptism was trine immer- 
sion." This is true of all the churches, both in Asia 
and in Africa, as well as in Europe. In fact, single 
immersion seems to have been employed only to a 
limited extent before the Reformation. 

However, leaving the Baptist writers, we call at- 
tention to a statement of Dr. William Wall, M. A., 
in his scholarly work, entitled " The History of In- 
fant Baptism " : " The way of trine immersion, or 
plunging the head of the person three times into the 
water, was the general practice of all antiquity." — 
Vol. II, page 419. 

The testimony of Pelagius, Bishop of Rome (in 
the sixth century), deserves consideration: "There 
are many who say that they were baptized in the name 
of Christ alone, and by a single immersion. But the 
Gospel command, which was given by God himself, 
and our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, reminds us 
that we should administer holy baptism to every one 
in the name of the Trinity, and by trine immersion; 
for our Lord said to his disciples, ' Go, baptize all 
nations, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the Holy Ghost.' "—Chrystal's "History of 
the Modes of Baptism," page 80. 

Having seen what one of the early bishops of Rome 
had to say, we now call on Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, 
born A. D. 315: "After these things ye were led to 
the holy pool of divine baptism, as Christ was carried 


from the cross to the sepulchre. And each of you 
was asked whether he believed, etc. ; and made that 
saving confession, and descended three times into the 
water and ascended again; — and that water of sal- 
vation was a grave to you/' — " Pengilly on Baptism/' 
page 151. 

It may interest the reader to learn what view John 
Wesley took of the triple action in baptism. Mr. 
Wesley was a very prolific writer, and at his death 
left his manuscript to trustees, who were to destroy 
the same, or make use of it as they deemed proper. 
Rev. Henry Moore was one of the trustees, and wrote 
a very complete account of Mr. Wesley's life and 
labors, entitled " Moore's Life of Wesley," consisting 
of two volumes, and in Vol. I, page 424, makes this 
statement : " When Mr. Wesley baptized adults, pro- 
fessing faith in Jesus, he chose to do it by trine im- 
mersion, if the person would submit to it, judging this 
to be the apostolic method of baptizing." 

The Trinity. 

In some of the chapters, already given, frequent 
reference has been made to the Trinity, the union of 
the three Persons, — Father, Son and Holy Ghost, — 
in the one Godhead. As presented to us in the Scrip- 
tures, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are equally 
divine, and also personally distinct from each other. 
In a certain, and a very important sense, the three are 
one, and yet, in another sense, equally important, they 
are three. In substance and purpose there can be 
no question about their oneness. In all the affairs of 
the universe they work together with a unity of plan, 
and a harmony of purpose, that is beyond the com- 


prehension of man. Even in the creation we find 
them working together. In Gen. 1 : 26 we read : 
" Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. ,, 
The " us " and " our " are plural, and mean a plurali- 
ty in the Godhead. It is also said in verse two: 
" And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the 
waters/' Here we have both the Father and the 
Spirit distinctly mentioned, as being together in the 
beginning of the creation. Turning to John 1 : 3, 
we have this statement, regarding Christ at the same 
period : " All things were made by him, and without 
him was not anything made that was made." (Also 
Col. 1: 16.) This makes it clear that the "us," of 
Gen. 1 : 26, means the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. 

Passing to the New Testament, we have the three 
clearly manifested at the baptism of Jesus (Matt. 3: 
16, 17). Commenting on this passage, John Wesley 
says : " We have here a glorious manifestation of the 
Trinity; the Father, speaking from heaven; the Son 
spoken to, and the Holy Spirit descending upon him." 
In 1 Peter 1 : 2 we have mention of the Father, the 
Spirit and Jesus Christ. In the closing verse of the 
thirteenth chapter of 2 Corinthians we read : " The 
grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, 
and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you 
all." We yet mention Matt. 28 : 19 : " Baptizing them 
into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of 
the Holy Ghost," where the doctrine of the Trinity is 
too clearly indicated to be misunderstood. 

Jesus at one time said : " I and my Father are one " 
(John 10: 30). In John 17: 11 the same truth is re- 
iterated, for there we are told that he prayed that his 
disciples might be one as he and the Father are one. 


And while they are spoken of as one, yet they are 
mentioned as doing their separate work. " My Fath- 
er worketh hitherto, and I work," says the Master in 
John 5: 17. This and other scriptures set forth the 
personality of the Father and the Son. For example, 
the Father sent the Son into the world, and not the 
Son the Father. The Father provided a body for the 
Son, and the Son offered up that body for a sin offer- 
ing. And even while on the cross he cried out, in 
deep soul-distress, to the Father. Then we further 
learn that the Father and the Son sent the Holy 
Spirit, while the Spirit sent neither of them. 

Here we again cite the baptismal formula : " Bap- 
tizing them into the name of the Father, and of the 
Son, and of the Holy Ghost." To be baptized into 
the name of the Father, is to be baptized into him. 
This is also true of the Son. Hence we read in 1 
John 2 : 24 : " Ye also shall continue in the Father and 
in the Son." Being baptized into each, we are in 
them, and can so continue in them. Gal. 3: 27 ap- 
plies in this connection : " For as many of you as 
have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." 
This is proof that we enter Christ by being baptized 
into him. We get into the Spirit the same way, and 
that is why we read: "If we live in the Spirit, let us 
also walk in the Spirit" (Gal. 5: 25). 

The three Persons in the Godhead, as presented in 
the baptismal formula, constitute the basis for the 
threefold immersion, as already shown. The three 
actions in baptism are in perfect accord with the three 
Persons in the Trinity. In a sense, the Father, Son 
and Holy Ghost are one, and yet they are three. Just 
so with baptism. It is to the unity of the three ac- 


tions that Paul refers, when he says: "One Lord, 
one faith, and one baptism " (Eph. 4:5). As Chrys- 
ostom says : " It is one baptism in three immersions 
of the body." One in one sense, and three in another. 

Not a Debatable Question. 

Trine immersion can hardly be considered a de- 
batable question. The simple fact that all leading 
denominations accept it as valid baptism, while there 
is more or less dispute about other modes, is the most 
convincing argument in defense of its being the true 
and original form, for it is hardly conceivable that 
the best thinkers in the religious world would happen 
to agree upon the very practice that is wrong. 

Trine immersion is quite satisfactory to the church- 
es that have adopted this form of baptism, and if it 
is sufficiently satisfactory for other religious bodies 
to accept it without question, what more should any 
one ask? If it is accepted, practically everywhere, 
then it becomes evident that it is not a debatable 
question. Those using the mode know that their bap- 
tism passes in all the leading churches, and when a 
baptism has proved itself good enough for that pur- 
pose, it is most assuredly above controversy, and 
ceases to be a matter of dispute. This must appear 
evident to any one who gives the matter any con- 
sideration whatever. 

When an administrator takes his applicant into the 
water and says : " I baptize thee into the name of the 
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost/' dip- 
ping him one time only, there are always doubts in 
the minds of some as to whether the administrator 


really did what he said he would do. But when an- 
other takes his candidate into the water, repeating the 
same form of words, and then dips his candidate at 
the mention of each name, there is never any contro- 
versy about his actions not lining up with his form 
of words. The controversy will be about the former 
and not about the latter. In the threefold form of im- 
mersion we offer a baptism whose validity is un- 
challenged by ninety-nine per cent of Christendom. 
In the matter of baptism it is the best there is, and 
certainly no one will care to look for anything better. 

Some Figures. 

Not only is trine immersion more widely approved 
than any other mode, but it is more extensively em- 
ployed, the world over, than any other form of im- 
mersion in existence. A few facts along this line 
should prove interesting, as well as instructive. 

Of the 165,000,000 Christians, now living, who have 
been immersed, more than nine-tenths have been bap- 
tized by trine immersion. Among the number may be 
mentioned the members of the Greek Church, the 
Orthodox Hebrews, the Abyssinian Church, the Ar- 
menian Church, the Brethren Church, and a few others. 
The greatest number that may be claimed for single 
immersion will not exceed ten or twelve millions, and 
nearly all of these are found in the United States. 
Not only so, but of the 290,000,000, who received 
sprinkling or pouring for baptism, no fewer than 200- 
000,000 had the water applied three times. 

These are startling figures, and show that a very 
large per cent of the Christian world is fully com- 


mitted to the triple action in baptism. In fact, some 
of the large bodies here credited with trine immer- 
sion have never been known to practice anything else. 
They may have made many departures from the true 
faith, but in the matter of baptism they have clung 
to the triple form practically through all the centuries 
of the Christian era. 

This is an argument worth considering. It is the 
voice of millions coming down through the centuries. 
Not mere millions, but in case of the Greek Church 
it represents the voice of millions of Greeks, who read 
the New Testament in the original Greek, and they 
should certainly be credited with understanding their 
own language. 

Bowing in Baptism. 

If there is any one thing, mentioned in the Scrip- 
tures, that is more clearly settled than any other, it 
is the fact that the Lord never authorized the per- 
formance of a duty backward. When the children of 
Israel crossed the Red Sea, under the leadership of 
Moses, they were told to "go forward" (Ex. 14: 
15), and forward they went, with the waters of the 
sea standing up in heaps (Psa. 78: 13). Paul, in 1 
Cor. 10: 2, cites this instance as typical of Christian 
baptism, saying that they, the Israelites, " were all 
baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea." 
In Jer. 7: 24 we read of those who "hearkened not, 
nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and 
in the imagination of their evil heart, and went back- 
ward, and not forward." 

Paul, in Rom. 6 : 3, says " that so many of us as 


were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his 
death." In verse 5 he says, " In the likeness of his 

Baptism is a burial, but it is in the likeness of the 
death of the Savior who, when he died on the cross, 
" bowed his head, and gave up the ghost " (John 19: 
30). In the water of baptism, the applicant, who is 
baptized in the likeness of the Savior's death, bows 
as. Jesus did, and in this act gives up the world, and 
its evils, as surely as the Lord of glory gave up his 

Not only do the Scriptures, and even reason itself, 
favor the forward action in baptism, but all known 
history, applying to the subject, is on that side of the 
question. A number of quotations might be given, 
but we will let one from Dr. Adoniram Judson, a 
Baptist writer, and a widely-known missionary, suf- 
fice. In his work on baptism, pages 112 and 113, he 

" All the Baptists in the world, who have sprung 
from the English Baptists, have practiced the back- 
ward posture. But from the beginning it was not so. 
In the apostolic times the administrator placed his 
right hand on the head of the candidate, who then, 
under the pressure of the administrator's hand, 
bowed forward, aided by the genuflection which in- 
stinctively comes to one's aid, when attempting to 
bow in that position, until his head was submerged, 
and then rose by his own efforts." In fact, the back- 
ward action in baptism can not be traced to any earlier 
date than about the time of the Reformation. It is, 
therefore, of quite recent origin. 


Laying On Hands. 

Enough is said in the New Testament about the 
laying on of hands, to indicate that hands were laid 
on all converts sooner or later, following their bap- 
tism. We read that after Paul had properly instruct- 
ed and then baptized the twelve certain disciples at 
Ephesus, he " laid his hands on them " (Acts 19: 6). 
For some reason, not mentioned in the account of the 
circumstance, Philip, the evangelist, did not lay hands 
on those he baptized during his revival meeting at 
Samaria, but a little later, — possibly a week or such 
a matter, — Peter and John came up from Jerusalem 
and performed this service. Referring to those bap- 
tized, we read : " Then laid they their hands on them, 
and they received the Holy Ghost" (Acts 8: 17). 
In keeping with these examples, the minister, after 
baptizing penitent believers, should lay his hands on 
them, and pray over them. This we regard as a 
consecration service, — a ceremony in which new-born 
creatures are fully set apart for the Lord's service. 
The prayer should be a most impressive one, and 
ought to make a lasting impression on the soul of 
those receiving the blessing. 

Sins Forgiven. 

Speaking as he was directed by the Holy Ghost, 
Peter, on the Day of Pentecost, told the earnest be- 
lievers to " repent, and be baptized ... in the 
name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins " 
(Acts 2: 38). From this we learn that the remission 
of sins should follow the sacred rite of baptism. 


Ananias, the faithful minister of the Word, who by 
God was sent to assist Paul in entering the church, 
told him to " arise, and be baptized, and wash away 
thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord " (Acts 22: 
16). This was as much as to say: "Arise, and be 
baptized for the remission of your sins." In the time 
of the apostles it seems to have been well understood 
that the remission of sins followed baptism. Those 
who believed on Christ as their Savior, made the good 
confession, repented of their wrongdoings, and were 
baptized, felt assured that their sins had been par- 
doned, — that they had been saved from their sins ; 
were in Christ, having been baptized into him, and 
were therefore in a saved state. 

The one who has sufficient faith in the Master to 
do what he has commanded, fully realizes that, having 
been justified by faith, he has peace with God through 
our Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 5:1). With him it is 
not a matter of conjecture, for he knows that he has 
passed from death unto life (John S : 24). He knows 
the truth, — knows it, to believe and obey, — and the 
truth has made him free. He is no longer under 
bondage to sin, but is a free man in Christ Jesus, for 
when Jesus, through his atoning blood, has made one 
free, he is free indeed (John 8: 36). 

Receiving the Holy Ghost. 

Referring to Jesus, John the Baptist at one time 
said : " I indeed have baptized you with water, but he 
shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost " (Mark 1:8). 
In the American Revision we have this rendering: 
" In water " and " In the Holy Spirit/' This promise 


was fulfilled when the apostles and other saints 
" were filled with the Holy Ghost " on the Day 
of Pentecost (Acts 2:4). While thus filled, and un- 
der the influence of the Spirit, Peter told those in- 
quiring after the way of salvation to repent and to be 
baptized for the remission of sins, and they should 
"receive the gift of the Holy Ghost " (v. 38). In 
the next verse he says : " For the promise is unto 
you, and to your children, and to all that are afar 
off." By promise is meant the remission of sins and 
the Holy Spirit. We read that those whom Philip 
baptized at Samaria (Acts 8: 17), as well as the 
twelve whom Paul baptized at Ephesus (Acts 19: 6), 
received the Holy Ghost. 

All of this was in keeping with the promise that 
John made, as well as with what Peter had declared. 
To all penitent believers, who were buried with Christ 
in baptism, the promise was emphasized, and when 
they complied with the conditions, and had hands laid 
on them, they were filled with the Holy Ghost, and 
were thus greatly blessed. Peter, as we have seen, 
says that the promise is " to all that are afar off." 
That means us. It means " as many as the Lord our 
God shall call" (Acts 2: 39), and the invitation is 
to all, to accept Jesus in faith and obedience, the gift 
of the Holy Ghost being assured. 

The New Birth. 

Nicodemus, a ruler among the Jews, and a man of 
some distinction, heard much about the preaching and 
work of Jesus, and one night called on him, evidently 
seeking information regarding his claims. Jesus at 


once presented, for his consideration, one of the fun- 
damentals of his teachings, saying: " Except a man be 
born again he can not see the kingdom of God." See- 
ing that he was not understood, he added this : " Ex- 
cept a man be born of water and of the Spirit he can 
not enter into the kingdom of God" (John 3: 3-5). 
By " born of water," in this instance, baptism is 
meant. It can mean nothing else. 

To be born of the Spirit means not only the receiv- 
ing of the Spirit, but it includes " being born again, 
not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the 
word of God, which liveth and abideth forever " 
(1 Peter 1 : 23). The Word of God, the seed of the 
kingdom, is planted in the heart. The heart takes 
hold of the Word, and the Word takes hold of the 
heart, resulting in a new creature, hence a new 
birth, — born from above, born of God, born of the 
Spirit. All of this must be understood in connection 
with what James 1 : 18 says : " Of his own will begat 
he us with the word of truth," — the Word and the 
Spirit playing their active parts. 

In a sense, it is a twofold birth, — born of water, 
born of the Spirit. It is a water baptism and also 
a Spirit baptism. In the water baptism the body is 
completely enveloped. In the Spirit baptism the soul 
or spirit of man is baptized in the Spirit, — is brought 
completely under the influence of the Spirit. The 
birth of water and the birth of the Spirit must be 
considered jointly. By divine appointment they go 
together. There is no separating them with the bless- 
ed promises following. 

Jesus makes the twofold birth of water and of the 


Spirit essential to an entrance into the kingdom. We 
enter the world through a material birth, but the 
kingdom of God must be entered through the spiritual 
birth ; that is, born of water and of the Spirit. Man 
administers the rite of water baptism. But God, 
through Jesus Christ, his Son, administers the Spirit 
baptism. This is in accord with what John the Bap- 
tist taught when he said : " I indeed baptize you with 
water, but he [Jesus] shall baptize you with the Holy 

The Door Into the Church. 

The entrance into the church, or the kingdom, is 
by the way of the new birth. One gets into the 
church, — the family of God on earth, — by being born 
into it. In this connection the law of adoption must 
be considered, for God so decreed that " as many as 
received him, to them gave he the right to become 
children of God" (John 1: 12, R. V.). That is, to 
" receive the adoption of sons." " And because ye 
are sons," says Paul in Gal. 4:6," God hath sent 
forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts." 

The process of the new birth, and the process of 
spiritual adoption are measurably the same. The 
Word of truth, the Spirit, the Father and the Son, 
along with baptism, and the steps leading up to bap- 
tism, figure in both. Baptism, however, is the outward 
or visible act, while the Spirit baptism is the inward, 
or invisible act. The penitent believers, who under- 
go this process, — born of water and of the Spirit, — 
enter through the door into the church, and there- 
by become the adopted sons and daughters of God. 


It is then that the Spirit can and will bear witness 
with their spirit that they are the children of God 
(Rom. 8: 16). The whole initiatory process, that 
admits men and women into the church of Jesus 
Christ, is included, from first to last, in and along 
with the new birth. To be born again, is to enter 
the church. And if, what Jesus said to Nicodemus 
is true, and it is, then there is no other divinely-ap- 
pointed way of entering the kingdom of God on earth. 

A New Creature. 

Every person born into the kingdom becomes a 
new creature in Christ Jesus. In the baptism of 
water and of the Spirit there is a putting off of the 
old man, and a putting on of the new man (Col. 3: 
10). It is a burial of the old man of sin, and the 
coming forth of the new man. It is the act of put- 
ting on Christ in the rite of holy baptism (Gal. 3: 
27), and we are told that " if a man be in Christ, he 
is a new creature : old things are passed away " (2 
Cor. 5: 17). There is a new heart, a renewed spirit, 
and a new purpose of life. On entering the king- 
dom, he starts as a new-born babe; he grows as a 
new man, being a new creature, — spiritually speak- 
ing, — a new creation, begotten by the Word of Truth. 
Fed on the sincere milk of the Word, he lives a new 
and a different life. The things he once hated he will 
now love, and the things he once loved he will now 
hate. He thus lives and grows until the full stature 
in Christ Jesus is reached. 


Sealed With the Holy Spirit. 

Every child of God, on being born into the king- 
dom, and adopted into the family of God on earth, 
is "sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise" (Eph. 
1 : 13). Read this verse carefully: " In whom ye al- 
so trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the 
gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye 
believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of 
promise. " Here we have trusting, hearing the Word, 
and believing, followed by the sealing with the Spirit. 
The term, " after that ye believed," includes the du- 
ties for which saving faith calls. 

A little farther on, in the same epistle, Paul refers 
to this sealing the second time, saying : " Grieve not 
the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto 
the day of redemption" (Eph. 4: 30). From these 
two citations, studied in connection with the subjects, 
so far treated, we learn that every true, penitent be- 
liever, who puts on Christ Jesus in baptism, and re- 
ceives the gift of the Holy Spirit, is by that same 
Spirit sealed. That is, the seal of God, through the 
Spirit, is placed on every man and every woman 
born from above. God knows his spiritual children ; 
they have the divine seal, and, remaining loyal to 
that seal, no one shall ever be able to pluck them out 
of the Father's hands. 

It is a mistake to regard baptism as the seal of the 
kingdom. It is never so designated in the New Tes- 
tament. It is a visible part of the initiatory rite into 
the kingdom, being the visible part of the new birth, 
but it is not a seal. Man may administer baptism, 


but he is never permitted to handle the seal. God, 
through the Spirit, does the sealing, and he never 
makes a mistake. If all those who enter the church 
could be led to realize what it means to be a sealed 
child of God, — sealed with the Holy Spirit unto the 
day of redemption, we would have a different church 
from what we now have. 

The Divine and Human Parts in Conversion. 

In the process of conversion, as set forth in the 
New Testament Scriptures, there is a divine part, as 
well as human part. Man performs the human part, 
while the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, look 
after the divine side. The lack of this very necessary 
distinction, when treating the subject of conversion, 
has led to many errors. 

We read, " By grace are ye saved." This is the 
divine part of salvation, and yet there is something 
more in the plan of redemption than mere grace. 
Then, on the other hand, we read that " by faith are 
ye saved." Still, in order to complete the process of 
conversion, there is something more than faith de- 
manded. We further read, " Except ye repent ye 
shall all likewise perish." Paul was told to " arise 
and be baptized and wash away thy sins." These, 
along with faith, are human parts in the New Tes- 
tament plan, but these of themselves will not answer 
the purpose. True, they are divinely-appointed con- 
ditions, but we must look even beyond conditions for 
the pardoning power. Though we read, " The like 
figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save 
us," still, strictly speaking, baptism does not save. 



The real saving power is beyond all rites and cer- 
emonies, or beyond anything that is our privilege, or 
even our duty, to perform. 

The saving power is in the hands of the Lord, who 
alone exercises it when his clearly-revealed conditions 
are properly complied with. Through the apostles he 
has enjoined faith, repentance and baptism, not that 
they have in them any power or element to remove 
sins, but that the sinner may by them be brought to a 
condition where the Lord can and is willing to pardon 
his sins. While the sinner may, and should, see the 
hand as well as the wisdom of God in these duties, 
he nevertheless looks beyond them to the hand and 
power that releases him from the burden of sin and 
enrolls his name among the redeemed. 

Jesus has promised to save those who believe, re- 
pent and are baptized. He has pledged himself to 
pardon their sins, if they sincerely comply with these 
conditions, but he has not taught them to look to 
these or any other duties, rites or ceremonies, for the 
saving power. It is to Jesus that they must look for 
the Power that saves or pardons. Then, on the other 
hand, they are not to look to Jesus, expecting salva- 
tion while, at the same time, willfully neglecting the 
conditions. While there may be no inherent virtue 
in the conditions themselves, — for the real virtue is in 
Jesus and his atoning blood, — still there are no Gos- 
pel grounds for expecting God to apply this virtue, or 
pardoning power, in the absence of the conditions, — 
especially so when the conditions are knowingly neg- 

The authority to exercise the pardoning privilege, 


in behalf of the one who has faith and repentance, 
but for some reason has not been permitted to receive 
the rite of Christian baptism, may possibly be reserved 
by God as an act of special grace, but Jesus never so 
taught, nor were the apostles at any time authorized 
to promulgate such a doctrine. The plain, simple 
teaching of the New Testament is to believe, repent 
and be baptized for the remission of sins. To all 
such the promise is that their sins shall be pardoned, 
they shall receive the Holy Spirit, and henceforth 
be numbered with the saints, and entitled to all the 
rights and privileges of the Christian church. 

What is said about salvation by grace, or being 
saved by hope, or by the atoning blood, does not set 
aside the duties required of sinners seeking salvation, 
but rather includes them, and the man who makes a 
business of emphasizing the divine side, and min- 
imizing the human side, is doing violence to God's 

The fact of the matter is that, in the performance 
of duty, the sinner has his heart changed by faith, 
his conduct by repentance and his relation by bap- 
tism, but the pardoning act itself takes place in 
heaven, where the record is kept. The moment he 
performs his duty, just that moment does he receive 
pardon. In his own heart he feels that his sins have 
been removed and that he is a saved man. He does 
not feel that faith, repentance and baptism have saved 
him, for in them is no special merit, but he does 
realize that he has been saved by the direct and per- 
sonal power of God. He sees and feels the real hand 
of God, the power of Jesus and the influence of the 


Holy Spirit in his salvation. Faith, repentance and 
baptism have led him where Jesus has promised to 
meet him with pardon. He has performed the con- 
ditions and from the Lord received the assurance of 
pardon. And still none of the New Testament re- 
quirements should be looked upon as arbitrary. They 
are in perfect keeping with man's needs and the very 
nature of things. God, knowing what is in man, 
knew how to harmonize every requirement with the 
laws that govern thought, as well as matter. 

Some Examples of Conversion. 

When Jesus, just before his departure from earth 
to heaven, sent forth his disciples into all the world, 
to preach the Gospel to every creature, he outlined, 
as given by the different evangelists, in what is known 
as the Great Commission, the entire process of con- 
version. This process consists of hearing the Word 
preached, of believing on the Lord Jesus Christ, of 
repentance, of being baptized, — to be followed by the 
remission of sins. In Mark 16: 15 the apostles were 
told to " preach the gospel." This means hearing, 
on the part of those taught. In the next verse we 
read : " He that believeth and is baptized shall be 
saved." Here we have faith, baptism and pardon, 
for the term " saved " means pardon, or the " re- 
mission of sins," as it is stated in another part of the 
commission, recorded in Luke 24: 47. In the same 
verse " repentance " is given, as a part of the com- 
mission, as well as a part of the process of conversion. 
In John 20: 23 the promise of pardon, or salvation 
from sins, is stated in this form : " Whose soever sins 


ye remit, they are remitted unto them ; and whose so- 
ever sins ye retain, they are retained." By yet adding 
the part recorded in Matt. 28 : 19, we have the process 
complete : " Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, 
baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of 
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost/' What follows the 
process of conversion will be found in the next verse : 
" Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I 
have commanded you." In connection with these in- 
structions, Jesus told his faithful apostles, to whom 
he was entrusting the Word, " For John truly bap- 
tized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the 
Holy Ghost not many days hence" (Acts 1: 5). 
Prior to this time, and before his crucifixion, he told 
them that if he should go away to the Father, he would 
send them the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, and that 
the Spirit would guide them into all truth, and should 
bring to their remembrance all things whatsoever he 
had taught them (John 14: 26; 16: 7-13). 

On the Day of Pentecost this promise was ful- 
filled, and on that occasion the apostles were " filled 
with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other 
tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance " (Acts 
2:4). It will now be well to follow these Spirit- 
filled men in their work, see how they understood 
their instructions, and observe how they performed 
their duties. Being filled with the Spirit, and being 
led by the Spirit in all they said and did, it is to be 
presumed they did just what the Master intended they 
should do. We shall, therefore, consider a few ex- 
amples of conversions under their instructions. 


On the Day of Pentecost. 

We notice first the conversion of the three thousand 
on the Day of Pentecost. On this occasion there was 
a clear manifestation of the presence of God. This 
was evidenced by the appearance of the " cloven 
tongues like as of fire," and the ability of the apostles 
to preach the Word, so that the people of different 
nationalities could hear what was said in their own 
language. We are not told how much preaching was 
done, or how much ground was covered in the ad- 
dresses delivered. 

But sufficient was said to give the people to under- 
stand that they had sinned, and that there was sal- 
vation only in and through the name of Jesus. Hun- 
dreds of them were pierced in the heart by what was 
said, and in the midst of Peter's sermon said, right 
out in the meeting, " Men and brethren, what shall 
we do " (Acts 2 : 37) ? There was enough in the 
preaching, regarding duty, to indicate that something 
must be done. This was Peter's opportunity. He had 
just received his instructions from the Master, and on 
this occasion, speaking as he was moved by the Holy 
Spirit, was prepared to give an answer that could not 
be misunderstood. 

In verse 38 we have these words : " Then Peter said 
unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you 
in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, 
and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. ,, In 
this answer we have clearly specified every point pre- 
sented by the Master, when he sent forth his disciples 
to preach the Gospel. 


To start with, we have the preaching of the Word, 
followed by sufficient faith to prompt inquiry after 
the way of salvation. Faith, though not mentioned, 
is implied, or understood; otherwise the men, 
pricked in the heart, would never have asked the ques- 
tion they did. Peter's answer, which followed, con- 
tains repentance, baptism, the remission of sins, and 
the gift of the Holy Spirit, — the very points con- 
tained in the commission. The expression, " Bap- 
tized ... in the name of Jesus Christ, ,, evident- 
ly means " into the name of the Father, and of the 
Son, and of the Holy Ghost," for this is the way the 
Master had told his disciples to administer the rite, 
and it is unreasonable to suppose that, guided by the 
Spirit, they would go contrary to the instructions re- 

Since Jesus incorporated the hearing of the Word, 
faith, repentance, baptism and the remission of sins, 
in his last commission to his apostles, and since these 
apostles, guided by the Spirit, named all these points, 
when instructing the first applicants following the re- 
ceiving of their instructions, it certainly must be evi- 
dent that this is just what they understood the Master 
to teach. And since they thus understood the com- 
mission, it certainly follows that this must be its real 
meaning. There is no reasonable way of escaping 
this conclusion. 

the Three Thousand Were 

After Peter had told those inquirers after the way 
of salvation what to do, it is said of them that " they 


that gladly received the word were baptized; and the 
same day there were added unto them about three 
thousand souls" (Acts 2: 41). The process, as it 
related to their conversion, consisted in receiving the 
Word, believing in the Lord, repenting of their sins 
and being baptized, by the authority of Christ, " into 
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
Holy Ghost." 

The Record says that three thousand were added 
unto the church that day. By this we understand 
that having, in good faith, accepted the conditions of 
membership, they were taken to a place of sufficient 
water, and were baptized in the manner Jesus had 
instructed his apostles to administer the rite. When 
in Jerusalem, in 1898, we experienced no difficulty 
in finding a suitable place for the performance of 
the rite on a large scale. 

In the time of Christ, Jerusalem, a very prosperous 
place, was a city of pools, and the ruins of a number 
of these pools may yet be seen. On the west side of 
the old part of the city is a deep ravine, containing 
two large pools, one called the Upper Gihon and the 
other the Lower Gihon. They are about one-half 
mile apart, the former lying nearly 2,000 feet west of 
the Jaffa Gate, and the latter over 1,000 feet south 
and a little to the west. The upper pool is nearly 
300 feet long, 192 feet wide, and nineteen feet deep. 
It is fed by the rains from the sloping hills, and must 
have been kept well filled in the time of the apostles. 
The lower pool, formed by a dam across the valley, 
is nearly 600 feet long, 219 feet wide, and thirty-five 
feet deep at the lower end. The upper end, as well as 


the sides, are sloping. The road to Bethlehem crosses 
the ravine on the ancient dam. The pool is fed by 
rains, and though dry now, would have served as an 
ideal place for baptizing the thousands who applied 
for admission into the church on the day of Pen- 
tecost. The upper part of the pool could have been 
entered at a number of points, and here the twelve 
apostles, assisted by some of the seventy, could easily 
have baptized the three thousand converts inside of 
an hour or two. 

The hillsides form a kind of natural amphitheater 
on an immense scale, sufficient to have accommodated 
more than a hundred thousand people, should there 
have been that number present to witness the re- 
markable scene. While there are other places about 
the city where the rite might have been performed, 
we saw none so satisfactory as this one. The pool is 
easy of access; the accommodations are fine, and we 
see no reason why the assembly might not have gone 
to this place, when it was announced by Peter, or 
some other one of the apostles, that they would pro- 
ceed to the water and baptize all those who were will- 
ing to confess Christ. After considering the con- 
ditions carefully, we reached the conclusion that the 
upper end of this great pool must have been the scene 
of the remarkable baptism. 

Conversion of the Eunuch. 

Having seen how the three thousand were con- 
verted in a great meeting, it may be helpful to con- 
sider a case of conversion brought about by a per- 
sonal effort. After Philip, the evangelist, had closed 


his splendid revival at Samaria, where both men and 
women confessed Christ, were baptized, and then 
received the Holy Ghost, in the laying on of hands, 
an angel of the Lord told him to go towards the south, 
past Jerusalem, into the road that led to Gaza. On 
reaching the point designated, he came in contact 
with the eunuch, a government official of Ethiopia, 
a man of high standing. The eunuch was reading a 
portion of the Bible at the time, and asked Philip to 
sit with him in his chariot. This led to an explana- 
tion of the scriptures he was reading, and gave Philip 
an occasion to preach Jesus to the man. We are not 
told how long Philip talked, or what all he said, but 
enough was said to convince the eunuch that Jesus is 
the Christ, and that there was something for him to 
do. It was a fine piece of personal work upon the 
part of Philip. 

As they proceeded, they came unto a certain water, 
and the eunuch asked for baptism. This showed that, 
in preaching Christ, Philip had said something about 
the initiatory rite. The eunuch was told that if he 
would believe with all his heart, he might be baptized. 
Philip believed in a heart service. The good con- 
fession was made, the eunuch saying, " I believe that 
Jesus Christ is the Son of God." We then read that 
they went both down into the water, and Philip bap- 
tized the eunuch. After this both came up out of the 
water (Acts 8: 26-39). 

In this instance of conversion we have the preach- 
ing of the Word, the hearing of the Word, the be- 
lieving in Christ, the confessing of Christ as the Son 
of God, and baptism, — repentance, of course, being 
understood. The eunuch evidently realized that his 


sins had been pardoned, that he was born from above, 
had become a child of God and had received the gift 
of the Holy Ghost, for it is said, " And he went on 
his way rejoicing " (Acts 8: 39). 

Here are all the characteristics of a case of genuine 
conversion. The conditions set forth, in the instruc- 
tions of Christ to his apostles, were fully complied 
with. There was no attempt, on the part of Philip, 
to evade any of the points of the commission. In 
fact, guided by the Spirit, nothing else could have 
been expected of him. A finer piece of personal 
work has never been done. God can trust a man like 
Philip; one who, in preaching the Gospel, insists on 
the letter, as well as on the spirit. 

Conversion of Saul. 

We now pass to the conversion of a man, who, 
when looking over his past life, regarded himself as 
having at one time been the chief of sinners (1 Tim. 
1: 15). Saul, as Paul was called before his conver- 
sion, was a well-educated Jew, and stood high among 
his own people. When the persecution arose, he took 
an active part in persecuting the Christians in and 
about Jerusalem. He even went so far as to ask for 
letters of authority, that he might proceed to Damas- 
cus, to arrest and persecute those who believed on 

We are told that, as he journeyed and came near 
to Damascus, a light from heaven, above the bright- 
ness of the sun, was flashed upon him, and that he 
fell to the earth, and heard a voice, saying : " Saul, 
Saul, why persecutest thou me ? " Then it was that 


he realized that he was in the grasp of some divine 
force, and asked, " Who art thou, Lord ? " Being told 
that it was Jesus, whom he was persecuting, he then, 
trembling and astonished, asked, " Lord, what wilt 
thou have me to do ? " In response to this inquiry, 
the Lord told him to go into the city and it should 
there be told him what he must do. When he arose, 
he found himself blind and was led into the city 
(Acts 9: 1-8). 

In the house of Judas he remained without sight 
for three days, eating and drinking nothing. If ever 
a man experienced heart repentance and soul re- 
morse, Saul did. The moment that Jesus spoke to 
him on the way, faith began its work in his soul, and 
led up to the godly sorrow that resulted in his 
thorough repentance. By special direction of the 
Lord, Ananias, a devout minister, went to Saul, tell- 
ing him that he had come that he might receive his 
sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost (Acts 9: 17). 
Then Ananias said to him : " And now, why tarriest 
thou? Arise and be baptized, and wash away thy 
sins, calling on the name of the Lord" (Acts 22: 
16). Having received his sight, it is said that he 
"arose and was baptized" (Acts 9: 18). 

In the narrative of this remarkable conversion we 
have clearly mentioned all the points embodied in the 
last and great commission of Jesus, viz., hearing the 
Word, faith, repentance, baptism, the forgiveness of 
sins, and being filled with the Holy Ghost. Ananias 
seems to have been as well informed regarding the 
conditions of pardon, as given by Jesus, as were the 
apostles themselves, and so performed his part, in 


the conversion of Saul, in exact accord with what was 
done on the Day of Pentecost. Placing both instances 
side by side, we have teaching, hearing, faith, repent- 
ance, baptism, remission of sins and receiving of the 
Holy Ghost. The same divine influence that directed 
the work at Pentecost, directed each movement in 
the conversion of Saul. 

When Saul was told to arise and be baptized, and 
wash away his sins, it was of course understood that 
his sins would be washed away in the cleansing blood 
of Christ. While baptism, wherever Christianity was 
known, was recognized as one of the divinely-ap- 
pointed conditions of pardon, it was understood that 
it was the atoning blood and not the water, that con- 
stituted the cleansing medium. It was in the act of 
baptism that Saul came in contact, in a symbolical 
sense, with the power that cancels sins. 

Saul did not have to go far for baptism. The 
river Abana runs through the center of Damascus, 
and a finer stream, in which to administer the rite 
of baptism, can hardly be found in the world. Ac- 
companied by others, Saul may have been taken to 
the river and there buried with Christ in baptism. 
In Rom. 6: 3-5 he tells just how it was done: " Know 
ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus 
Christ were baptized into his death ? " The " us " 
in this instance includes Paul, as he was called after 
his conversion. This implies that he got into Christ 
by being baptized into him. But we read further: 
" Therefore we are buried with him by baptism/' 
The Revised Version says : " We were buried. ,, So 
Paul would have us understand that when he was 


baptized he was buried by baptism. The only way 
to bury a man by baptism is to immerse him. This 
is positive proof from Paul's own pen that he was 
immersed. And we may therefore state with perfect 
confidence that when taken into the water Paul 
kneeled- down, and was immersed " into the name of 
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." 
He arose from the watery grave, having put off the 
old man, and put on the new man, realizing that his 
sins had been washed away in the blood of the Lamb, 
that he had received the gift of the Holy Ghost, and 
that he was in the hands of God a chosen vessel to 
bear the Gospel to the Gentile nations. 

Conversion of Cornelius. 

The last conversion that we shall notice is that of 
Cornelius, a devout Gentile, living at Caesarea, the 
best unconverted man of whom we have any account 
in the New Testament. For proof that he was un- 
converted, and therefore unsaved, when visited by 
the angel, and told to send for Peter, we quote from 
Acts 11: 14. The angel, speaking of Peter, said: 
" Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all 
thy house shall be saved." By this it will be seen 
that Cornelius was not a saved man until he accepted 
Christ and complied with the Gospel conditions of 
pardon. So far as he understood God, he was a 
devout man, and his prayers were heard in heaven, 
but he was not a converted man in the New Tes- 
tament sense. It required more than what he knew, 
at that time, about God and his will, to save him. So 
he was told to send for Peter, who would tell him 


words whereby he might be saved ; that is, saved from 
the sins of the past, and be made a member of the 
body of Christ. 

Peter's preaching led to his acceptance of Christ, 
and when he was baptized he was numbered among 
the saved. The Holy Ghost falling on him at the time 
it did, was not only regarded as proof of his full con- 
version, but as proof of the fact that the door of sal- 
vation was opened for the Gentiles, as well as for the 
Jews. Peter, seeing this clear evidence of the ac- 
ceptance of the Gentiles, asked if any one could for- 
bid water, that these believing Gentiles might be bap- 
tized. They were then baptized, evidently for the re- 
mission of sins, the same as had been commanded on 
the Day of Pentecost. 

In order to complete his conversion, Cornelius had 
to take the steps required of others. He believed in 
Jesus, turned from his errors, whatever they may 
have been, and put on Christ in the holy rite of bap- 
tism. He was not merely transplanted, as some teach, 
but was born again, and made a new creature in 
Christ Jesus. His conversion did not require so great 
a change as that experienced by Saul, but there was 
a change, nevertheless. There was a new birth, the 
necessary reformation in life, — the New Testament 
baptism, and the translation from his former state 
into the kingdom of God's dear Son. Like other men 
who accepted Christ, he had to be born again, and had 
no assurance of salvation until the new birth was 
completed. Generally speaking, he was the best man 
outside of the church, for his day and generation, 
but he did not become a member of the mystical body 


of Christ until he made the good confession and put 
on Christ in baptism. 

Receiving the Holy Ghost before baptism was the 
reversal of the rule, and was intended in this instance 
to convince Peter, and those with him, that the Gospel 
promises were for the Gentiles as well as for the 
Jews (Acts 11: 17, 18). And since this is the only 
instance where the Holy Ghost was given in this 
manner, it must be evident that the incident was a 
well-understood exception to the rule. 

But as regards the conditions of pardon, we have 
in this case just what we have found in the former 
instances cited. The conditions were the same for 
Saul, the chief of sinners, as for the devout Cor- 
nelius. They were the same for the eunuch, the high 
official of Ethiopia, as for the three thousand con- 
verted on the Day of Pentecost. For all, both Jews 
and Gentiles, there is the one Lord, the one faith, 
and the one baptism, the one law of pardon, and the 
one process of conversion. There was the usual birth 
" of water and of the Spirit," without which there is 
no promise of entrance " into the kingdom of God " 
(John 3: 5). 

Conversion, a Process. 

By conversion is meant a change from one state or 
condition to another. The doctrine of conversion 
provides for three changes. 

First, a change of the mind. This change is 
brought about by hearing the Word and believing it. 
The man who believes that Jesus is the Christ, the 
Son of God, has in his mind undergone a change 


from unbelief to belief. The change has been wrought 
by the Word being received into a good and honest 

Second, a change of conduct. This change is ef- 
fected by repentance. The man who believes is con- 
victed of sin. This conviction leads to godly sorrow, 
and we are told that " godly sorrow worketh repen- 
tance to salvation" (2 Cor. 7: 10). In the act of 
repentance the convicted man ceases to do evil and 
proceeds to do right. With him it is " right-about," 
turning away from the kingdom of Satan and seeking 
the kingdom of God. 

Third, a change in relationship. This change is 
consummated in the new birth, being born of water 
and of the Spirit. It is a putting on of Christ in bap- 
tism, or being baptized into Christ, and consummates 
the process that places one into the kingdom, and 
thereby makes him a child of God. 

In this whole process there are the divine agencies, 
the Word, the seed of the kingdom, and the Holy 
Spirit. It is a case of God working in the hearts of 
men and women " both to will and to do of his good 
pleasure" (Philpp. 2: 13). In all these changes the 
human and divine parts are in evidence. The faith 
that changes a man from an unbeliever to a believer 
is wrought by the divine Word in the heart. Repen- 
tance is produced by God working in the heart and 
soul to will and to do. In the change of the relation- 
ship, the new birth, we have the ever-present Spirit, 
at the most active period in the entire process of con- 
version. It is the making of a new creature in Christ 
Jesus, the burial of the old man, and the resurrection 


of the new man. By the yielding of the human 
forces, or the surrendering of all that is human to 
the divine influences and agencies, it is the consum- 
mation of a work in the scheme of redemption for 
which there is no parallel. 


Strictly speaking, regeneration may be designated 
as the creative act of God, and, through the agency 
of the Holy Spirit, performs its part in the process 
of conversion. The doctrine of regeneration runs 
almost parallel with the doctrine of the new birth. 
There can be no new birth without regeneration, 
while, on the other hand, regeneration can not be 
completed without the new birth. 

Regeneration is to generate again, or to make over. 
It is the inward work of grace in the soul, resulting 
in a new creature. There are outward processes, 
but regeneration is a work that goes on within. God, 
through his Word, performs a creative act in the soul. 
James 1 : 18 puts it this way: " Of his own will begat 
he us with the word of truth." In 1 Peter 1 : 23 we 
have the same thought presented in a different way: 
" Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of in- 
corruptible, by the word of God. ,, 

The term " regeneration " occurs but twice in the 
New Testament. We first refer to Titus 3 : 5 where 
we have this reading: "Not by works of righteous- 
ness which we have done, but according to his mercy 
he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and re- 
newing of the Holy Ghost." This shows that while 
salvation is of God, still it is accomplished in con- 


nection with an agency, here called the " washing of 
regeneration." The Revised Version (marginal read- 
ing) has it " laver of regeneration. " It is interesting 
to note the Syriac rendering of this verse: "Not ac- 
cording to works which we have done, but according 
to his mercy, he vivified us, by the washing of the 
new birth, and by the renovation of the Holy Spirit/' 

The term, " washing of regeneration," evidently re- 
fers to the washing associated with the process of 
regeneration. This, of course, means baptism. While 
regeneration is an inward process, it is, by divine ap- 
pointment, associated with baptism, which Paul calls 
the washing of regeneration. The man who is com- 
pletely regenerated, — made over, — made a new crea- 
ture, — a new man, — must, at the proper place, in the 
process of regeneration, submit to the ceremonial 
rite, which God, in his wisdom, has seen proper to 
associate with his part of the work. 

The second use of the term is in Matt. 19: 28, 
where Jesus says, speaking to his disciples : " Verily 
I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in 
the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the 
throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve 
thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." The 
term, in this instance, is thought to refer to the period, 
terminating with the second coming of Christ, in 
which the work of regeneration is going on in the 
world, and therefore has no special bearing on the 
creative act of God in the process of conversion. 

The work of regeneration, like the process of con- 
version, results in the new man in Christ Jesus. 
Whatever be the differences between conversion and 


regeneration, the final results are the same. The 
process proceeds along the same lines, in accomplish- 
ing a given result, — the regenerated man. 


Justification may be defined as the gracious act of 
God, whereby he pardons and accepts of sinners on 
the ground of the righteousness of Christ, who, by 
his death, atoned for sin. It is an act of God in which 
one is declared guiltless or acquitted. The justified 
man is one who is absolved from any and all guilt, 
and stands before God and the world as a free man. 

While justification, as a free act, is ascribed to 
God, "it is God that justifieth" (Rom. 8: 32) ; and 
while it is by faith, it must be borne in mind that it 
is not by faith alone. The most misleading doctrine 
in Christendom is the doctrine which teaches that man 
is justified by faith, independent of the duties which, 
by divine appointment, have been associated with 
faith. It is the acceptance of this doctrine that has 
led to the discarding of so many of the plain com- 
mandments presented in the teachings of Christ and 
the apostles. There is no greater test of faithfulness 
than obedience, and the man who believes and obeys 
is the man who is in a justified state. 

True, Abraham was justified by faith, but James 
2 : 22 says, " Faith wrought with works, and by works 
was faith made perfect." In verse 21 he would go 
even farther in affirming that Abraham was justified 
by works, when he had offered up his son Isaac on 
the altar. He would have both faith and obedience 
figure in justification. In fact, this is the real teach- 


ing of the New Testament, respecting justification. 
In the light of the teaching of Christ and the apostles, 
there is no such a thing as justification by faith alone. 
The faith that leads to justification must invariably 
be accompanied by the obedience that has been as- 
sociated with faith. The absence of this obedience 
renders faith ineffective. The man who firmly be- 
lieves that Jesus is the Christ, and that he brought 
into the world a saving Gospel, can not claim justi- 
fication on the ground of mere belief. His faith 
prepares him for the further steps leading up to 
justification, and it is only after he has taken these 
steps that he can consistently lay claim to the jus- 
tification that is by faith. In obedience his faith is 
made perfect, and then it is that the promise becomes 
his. One reaches the state of justification through 
a process, and faith is only one of the several steps 
in that process. 


The doctrine of sanctification runs all through the 
Bible, and is most clearly taught, as well as defined 
in Rom. 6 : 19, Revised Version : " For as ye pre- 
sented your members as servants to uncleanness and 
to iniquity unto iniquity, even so now present your 
members as servants to righteousness unto sanctifica- 
tion." The doctrine of sanctification, while closely 
related to the doctrine of holiness, consecration and 
even perfection, means the setting apart for a special 
purpose. God sanctified the seventh day. That is, 
he set the day apart for a holy or special purpose. 
It is said that he sanctified the tabernacle. It was 


dedicated to the Lord and his special use. When one 
is fully set apart to serve the Lord, or is dedicated 
to the Lord, or consecrated to his service, then he is 
sanctified, he is made holy. In John 17: 17 Jesus 
prayed the Father to sanctify his apostles " through 
thy truth " ; then he added : " Thy word is truth." 
The sanctification, or more fully setting apart, was 
to be effected through the truth. The Word of God 
gives directions how this may be done. In 1 Peter 
1 : 22 we read : " Seeing ye have purified your souls 
in obeying the truth through the Spirit/' Here the 
process is given. Men and women are to be purified, 
sanctified, or made holy, by obeying the truth. All of 
this is to be done through the Spirit, but not independ- 
ent of obeying the Word. Those who accept Christ 
in faith and comply with the conditions connected 
with conversion, regeneration and the new birth, are 
dedicated to the Lord's service, — consecrated, — and 
therefore sanctified and made holy. Like the apos- 
tles, they have been sanctified in obeying the truth. 
It is a complete dedication, a complete setting apart. 
But we are not here teaching the so-called doctrine 
of sinless perfection. There are those who hold that 
in sanctification they have reached a point of perfec- 
tion where it is impossible for them to sin. The 
claims of such pretenders have brought the doctrine 
into bad repute in many communities. As a rule, 
those who set up this claim for themselves, premed- 
itatedly ignore a number of the plain commands re- 
corded in the New Testament. We do not teach that 
kind of sanctification. The sanctification that we 
teach and emphasize is the complete setting apart of 
the new-born creature to the perfect service of God, 


and the man who yields himself to this perfect service 
will not knowingly ignore any of the divine require- 

The Cleansing Blood. 

There is no such a thing as sanctification without 
the blood of Christ, for in Heb. 13: 12 we read: 
" Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the 
people with his own blood, suffered without the gate." 
It will thus be seen that the blood of Christ, shed for 
the remission of sins, plays its part in the process of 
sanctification. Furthermore, it is declared that we 
are "justified by [or in] his blood" (Rom. 5: 9). 
Speaking of Christ, Paul in Eph. 1 : 7, says : " In 
whom we have redemption through his blood, the 
forgiveness of sins." The same truth is affirmed in 
Col. 1: 14: "In whom we have redemption through 
his blood." John declares (1 John 1:7)," The blood 
of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin," 
"and," says the writer of Hebrews (9: 22, R. V.), 
" apart from shedding of blood there is no remission." 

This makes Christ, as 1 John 2 : 2 puts it, " the 
propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but 
for the sins of the whole world." Further along in 
this epistle (4: 10) the same fundamental truth is 
reiterated : " Herein is love, not that we loved God, 
but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be a pro- 
pitiation for our sins." Or, in other words, Christ 
was offered for our sins, paying the price of our re- 
demption, thus bringing about the reconciliation be- 
tween man and God, by having us, when still " en- 
emies, reconciled to God." This is affirmed to have 


been done in the death of his Son (Rom. 5: 10). 
This is what we understand by the doctrine of the 
atonement, — the bringing of man back to God, — 
brought about through Christ, the Propitiation for our 
sins, who shed his blood for the sins of the whole 
world, and in whose blood there is remission of sins. 
And so it follows, as stated by Peter, " that ye were 
not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and 
gold, from your vain conversation received by tradi- 
tion from your fathers; but with the precious blood 
of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without 
spot" (1 Peter 1: 18, 19). Hence man's redemption 
must be ascribed to the blood of Christ, shed for the 
remission of sins. Here is the efficacy, and it is in 
obedience to his command in baptism that we, in a 
figure, come in contact with the blood that cleanseth 
us from all sins. It is by his atoning blood that we 
are cleansed, through faith and obedience to his Word. 

Going On to Perfection. 

What we have said so far relates to the beginning 
of the Christian's experience. Having been born 
into the family of God, he is now in a position to grow 
and develop. With him it should be a matter of 
Christian growth and usefulness in the kingdom. 

In Heb. 6: 1 Paul says: "Therefore leaving the 
principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto 
perf ection." By " the principles of the doctrine " is 
meant the things pertaining to the beginning of the 
Christian life. The foundation of faith, repentance, 
baptisms, — in water and in the Spirit, — the laying on 
of hands, and even the resurrection and eternal judg- 


ment, having been laid in the hearts of the converts, 
it was needless to treat these points further, and for 
that reason the apostles insisted on going on to per- 
fection, — to the higher and more perfect and there- 
fore the more useful life. 

No doctrine is more clearly taught in the New 
Testament than the doctrine of Christian perfection. 
To his disciples, Jesus once said : " Be ye therefore 
perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is 
perfect" (Matt. 5: 48). The Master meant that his 
disciples should strive for perfection in all things 
pertaining to their spiritual life. That is, they were 
to strive to reach the highest possible order of spir- 
itual attainments. Having been born anew, and hav- 
ing been made new creatures in Christ Jesus, this 
becomes the duty of every converted man and woman. 

Writing to Timothy, Paul would have it understood 
that one purpose of the Holy Scriptures is " that the 
man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto 
all good works" (2 Tim. 3: 17). Then in Heb. 13: 
21, it is added: "Make you perfect in every good 
work to do his will." The idea is perfection in every 
good work and every attainment in the Christian life 
and experience, and the doing of God's will perfectly. 

James 3 : 2 says : " If any man offend not in word, 
the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle 
the whole body." That is, able to hold the whole 
body in check, and direct its proper use. This is 
perfection in Christ Jesus, and is what is meant by 
u going on to perfection," or, in other words, going 
on to efficiency, until the whole body, the whole mind 
and the whole soul are brought under complete sub- 


Jection, and can be placed at the disposal of the Lord 
to worship, serve and obey his will perfectly. Noth- 
ing short of this should satisfy the highly-developed, 
spiritual child of God. 

A Life of Faithfulness. 

Faithfulness is faith in operation. In all Chris- 
tian lands Abraham is recognized as the father of the 
faithful. God trusted him, and he made good. He 
believed in God, and proved his faith by the life he 
lived. The value of faithfulness is recognized in 
every department of life. The man who is faithful 
to his trust is the man who is wanted and appreciated. 

Jesus was faithful, rendering perfect obedience to 
his Father. Doing the will of his Heavenly Father, 
was to him meat and drink. And all through his 
teachings do we 'find him, in one way or the other, 
placing special emphasis on the life of faithfulness. 
In Matt. 25 : 21, speaking of the winding up of the af- 
fairs of life, we have him saying: "Well done, thou 
good and faithful servant : thou hast been faithful over 
a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things." 
Writing to the saints at Ephesus, Paul calls them " the 
faithful in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 1: 1). Then he 
would have Timothy commit the preaching of the 
Word to none but "faithful men" (2 Tim. 2: 2). 
This, with what is said elsewhere, places a premium 
on faithfulness. 

The Christian who would prove true to the profes- 
sion he makes, must be faithful to his God, to his 
Word, to his church, and to every interest he repre- 
sents. With him it should be a lifelong effort, 


prompted by love. He serves his God, obeys his 
Word and respects his church, because he believes 
this to be the right thing to do, and because he loves 
to do the thing that is right. Faithfulness with him 
is not a matter of reward, but a matter of love for 
the right. To all men and women of this type Jesus 
would say : " Be thou faithful unto death and I will 
give thee a crown of life" (Rev. 2: 10). 

The Church, the Called Out. 

The term " church " means the called out. It 
means those who have heard the call of Christ, as 
well as the call of his servants, to come out from the 
world and become the faithful followers of their 
Master. In employing the word, we make (in this 
work) no distinction between the church of Christ 
and the kingdom of God on earth. Those who are 
members of the kingdom of God, are members of the 
church of Christ, and to enter the church means to 
enter the kingdom. As Jesus said to Nicodemus: 
" Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, 
he can not enter the kingdom of God." This is also 
true of entering the church. The new birth, as stated 
elsewhere, is the door into the church. 

The New Testament church was founded by Jesus 
Christ and is the only church he ever established. 
As a body, it was not formally organized at a cer- 
tain place, on a particular day and hour, but came 
into existence as the Master gathered the converted 
around him. Some of these converts were made by 
the preaching of John the Baptist, and became at- 


tached to the body of Christ in the early part of his 

Referring to the church, in this instance, we do 
not mean a local congregation, with its allotted ter- 
ritory, officers and regulations. We refer to the 
general church, of which Jesus is the Head. The 
church is his, and was purchased by his own blood. 
To him all saints are directly related, and thereby 
become and constitute the body of Christ upon the 
earth. For convenience, and better methods of work- 
ing, this body may be separated into local congrega- 
tions, and these congregations may be classed into 
districts, etc. Still Jesus is Head over all, not of one 
special church, but of all the members, whether in ^ 

local churches or out of them, for in the spreading of 
the Gospel among all nations there will occasionally 
be isolated converts not attached to any local con- 
gregation. The eunuch was a convert of this class. 
But when a congregation was formed in his vicinity, 
he, of course, was numbered with the saints at that 

Local Churches and Co-operation. 

It would appear that there were no congregations 
organized during the ministry of Christ. Not until 
after the Day of Pentecost do we find even a sem- 
blance of an organization. The apostles, by Jesus, 
had been ordained, and were therefore prepared for 
any line of church work. Some time after the con- 
version of the three thousand, we find them taking 
steps looking to the systematizing of the affairs of 
the church at Jerusalem. The selection of the 


enjoined by Christ or any of the New Testament 
writers. The function of any Conference is largely 
judiciary and executive, but not legislative. In its 
work it must be governed by what the New Testament 
teaches, both in word and spirit. The aim of a Con- 
ference should be the unity of the body, loyalty to 
the Scriptures, efficiency in service, and adoption of 
any wise method for advancing the interests of the 
kingdom of God. 

The Congregation and Her Work. 

Any congregation is duly authorized to put into 
operation any part of the Gospel pertaining to the 
work of the church. She can select her officers, ad- 
minister discipline and observe the ordinances of the 
house of God. It is her duty to see to the preaching 
of the Word, to the maintaining of the principles of 
the church, and in the unity of membership labor for 
the purity, loyalty and efficiency of the body. So 
long as she keeps within the limits of the Gospel it is 
her duty, in the administering of discipline, to loose 
or to bind. Regulated by the Gospel and guided by 
the Spirit, she can and should pass on the membership 
of her own body, her aim being to bring all the mem- 
bers of the body to the highest possible plane of liv- 
ing and usefulness. 

In the maintenance of purity, loyalty and efficiency 
in the membership, it becomes the duty of each and 
every congregation to administer discipline in an 
earnest, a wise, a loving and a faithful manner. 
Every member who has, by way of the new birth, 
entered the church family, is a child of God, and i* 


becomes the duty of the body organized to take a 
special interest in each new-born creature, and aid 
in developing and training such a one for Christ and 
his service. The life of a child of God is precious 
in the sight of the Great Father; he is an heir of the 
kingdom, and to trifle with his title to a home in the 
heavenly kingdom is a serious matter. Any attempt 
to disinherit him, before he has, by his waywardness, 
clearly forfeited his rights to the heavenly inheritance, 
will most assuredly meet with the disapproval of 
Heaven. It is the duty of the church to labor wisely 
and earnestly for the salvation of every one entering 
the church home, and in administering discipline this 
should be kept in view. 

And while this is true, the dignity, standing, purity 
and authority of the church must not be sacrificed. 
Upon the part of any well-organized body, charity 
and authority should stand side by side, and love and 
justice should go hand in hand. While protecting the 
rights and privileges of each one, the members, as 
a whole, should be brought to realize the importance 
of respecting the dignity, standing and authority of 
the church. No church can expect to have any stand- 
ing in a community unless she measures up well to 
her highest claims. The people of a community may 
have charity for a weak and indifferent church mem- 
ber, but they look with disdain upon a weak, indif- 
ferent and inconsistent church. If the church would 
have a good influence in any city, town or community, 
she will find it necessary to have her members, in their 
manner of living, in their dealings, and in everything 
else that goes to make up true manhood and woman- 


hood in Christ Jesus, measure up, as closely as pos- 
sible, to the higher claims of Christianity. Those 
around us may not accept some things we teach, but 
on every hand they will be found giving us credit 
for strength, firmness, and loyalty to the principles 
we teach, for consistency, and for the charity that is 
due to others. And while striving for these higher 
ideals, let each congregation have for its aim the 
saving of souls, the perfecting of the saints in Christ 
Jesus, and the making of the church an honor to the 
cause it represents. 

The Church and Her Officers. 

When writing the church at Philippi, Paul ad- 
dressed the saints in Christ Jesus, " with the bishops 
and deacons" (Philpp. 1:1). From this we are led 
to infer that the leading, working officers in the New 
Testament church were the bishops, or elders, and 
deacons. It is, of course, understood that the terms, 
" bishop " and " elder," in the New Testament, re- 
fer to one and the same officer, meaning the overseer 
of the congregation. There were also other officers, 
as named in Eph. 4: 11, where we read: "And he 
gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, 
evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers." The 
apostolic office terminated with the apostles them- 
selves, thus leaving prophets, evangelists, pastors and 
helpers. Pastors here means the shepherds, over- 
seers or elders of the flock. Prophets and evangelists 
doubtless refer to the ministers, and the term 
" teachers " to the deacons, and, possibly, to the 
younger ministers. Hence, a properly-officered con- 


gregation would have, for her leaders, elders, min- 
isters and deacons. 

We learn from Eph. 4: 12, 13 that the purpose of 
these officers is " for the perfecting of the saints, for 
the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the 
body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the 
faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto 
a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of 
the fulness of Christ." The elders, or those in charge 
of the congregations, are told to " take heed there- 
fore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which 
the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the 
church of God, which he hath purchased with his 
own blood" (Acts 20: 28). The ministers are in- 
structed to " preach the word ; be instant in season, 
out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long- 
suffering and doctrine" (2 Tim. 4: 2). Our term 
" deacon " comes from a word meaning service, and 
it falls to the lot of the deacons to serve the church 
along lines not fully occupied by the elders and min- 
isters. So they look after the poor, interest them- 
selves in the sick and the unfortunate, and take a 
special oversight of the finances and business af- 
fairs of the church in general. 

In Titus 1: 6-9, and 1 Tim. 3: 1-13 we have the 
qualifications and, to some extent, the duties of elders 
and deacons clearly set forth. They are presumed to 
be, as leaders and servants, the most faithful, efficient 
and exemplary members in the congregation. In fact, 
the average standard reached by any body of saints 
in Christ Jesus depends largely on the efficiency and 
loyalty of the leadership. As regards the ministry, 


Paul instructed Timothy to commit the Word to none 
but " faithful men, who shall be able to teach others 
also" (2 Tim. 2: 2). This means faithfulness and 
efficiency of a high order. 

In order to carry out the apostolic idea of doing 
things, there should be a plurality of elders in every 
congregation, and while one of the number may take 
the lead, there ought to be a careful cooperation of 
these elders in looking after the spiritual interests 
of the church. In fact, there should be a perfect 
understanding between all of the church officials, and 
the greater the harmony among them in their work, 
the greater will be the confidence upon the part of the 
membership. Regarding the authority for a plurality 
of elders, we cite such scriptures as Titus 1 : 5, Acts 
14: 23; 20: 17, and Philpp. 1:1. At any rate, there 
should be at least one resident elder in every con- 
gregation. There is no scripture for the nonresi- 
dent elder, though it may occasionally be an exceed- 
ingly unfortunate necessity. But such a state of af- 
fairs should not be continued any longer than abso- 
lutely necessary. The New Testament plan is to or- 
dain elders in every church. That is, let each church 
have its own elders. 

The Church, — Her Name. 

In the New Testament the believers in Christ Jesus 
are designated by different names. They are some- 
times known as disciples or learners (Acts 9: 1 and 
26). At Antioch they were first called Christians 
(Acts 11 : 26). A number of times they are denom- 
inated saints, but in Matt. 23: 8 they are very dis- 


tinctly pointed out as brethren : " All ye are brethren/' 
In John 21 : 23, R. V., we read: " This saying there- 
fore went forth among the brethren/' As an assem- 
bly, the believers are called simply " the church," 
meaning the called out, or those who have come out 
from the world and become members of the body of 
Christ. We have such names as " churches of 
Christ/' " church of God," " church of the first born," 
" house of God," " kingdom of heaven," and even 
others. Locally speaking, we read of the church at 
Jerusalem, at Antioch, and at other points. 

Taking the country over, the followers of Christ 
were probably known as Christians, and sometimes 
as Nazarenes, but among themselves they were re- 
garded as brethren, and were even called " holy 
brethren" (1 Thess. 5: 27). But, generally speak- 
ing, they do not seem to have adopted any specific 
name. The church of Christ, the church of God, 
the saints or brethren, were all the same to them. 
They were more concerned about living the Christ 
life, converting sinners and establishing churches in 
every city, than they were about reaching an agree- 
ment respecting the one name by which they should 
be known. It would appear that they simply left 
the name question to take care of itself. 

A Separate People. 

The true followers of our Lord and Master have 
always been recognized as a separate people. They 
belong to a kingdom that is not of this world (John 
18: 36). Those who put off the old man with his 
evil deeds, and then put on the new man, are expected 


to separate themselves from everything that is evil, 
and even the things that have the appearance of evil. 
The call to a separate life may be found in 2 Cor. 
6: 17, where we read: "Wherefore come out from 
among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and 
touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you." 
Every person who has been born of God, who has 
been dedicated, consecrated and sanctified, — set apart 
wholly for the Lord's service, has heeded the call to 
come out from the world. Having done so, such per- 
sons will not be found living, thinking and doing as 
the sinful and unconverted world does. With them, to 
be a separate people, means something. Their re- 
ligion stands for something that is worth while, hence 
they will be found living on a much higher spiritual 
plane than that occupied by those who make no pre- 
tensions in the interest of going on to perfection. 
They soon learn, in behalf of the kingdom they rep- 
resent, to shun the things that are unbecoming devout 
men and women. With them it is not how much 
they can trifle with the doubtful and questionable, 
and not sin, but how far they can keep away from the 
things that are misleading, detrimental and evil in 
their tendency. The separate life marks a distinction 
between them and the unconverted that ought not 
to be misunderstood. Being born from above, be- 
longing to another kingdom, and living a new life in 
thought, purpose and action, marks the unmistakable 


The Lord's Day. 

Living in a New Dispensation, being governed by 
the Gospel, instead of the law of Moses, intended for 
the Old Dispensation, the people of the Lord demand 
a Lord's Day, — one suited to the genius of the re- 
ligion they have accepted. This they have in the first 
day of the week. In Acts 20: 7 we read of the dis- 
ciples coming together " upon the first day of the 
week." Paul wrote to the saints at Corinth, saying: 
" Upon the first day of the week let every one of you 
lay by him in store" (1 Cor. 16: 2). These citations 
indicate that the Christians of the apostolic times had 
adopted the first day of the week, the day we call 
Sunday, as a day of special services. Speaking of the 
day, John, in Rev. 1:10, says : " I was in the Spirit on 
the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, 
as of a trumpet." It is called the Lord's day in the 
New Testament for the same reason that the love 
feast is designated as the Lord's supper. Each 
pertains to the new dispensation and the new king- 
dom. The ushering in of the new order of things, 
under the Gospel, with a new law and a new Law- 
giver, created a necessity for new and different in- 

This leads up to the fact that there is a difference 
between the Law and the Gospel, — the former be- 
longs to the old dispensation, while the latter pertains 
to the new. Moses represents the Law, while Jesus 
represents the Gospel. These institutions are referred 
to under different heads. We speak of them as the 
Old Covenant and the New Covenant, and the Old 


Testament and the New Testament. Then we read 
of a "better testament " (Heb. 7: 22), implying that 
there was an inferior testament. The terms " cov- 
enant " and " testament," translated from the same 
word in the original, refer to the same thing. 

We read that " the law and the prophets were unitl 
John: since that time the kingdom of God is 
preached" (Luke 16: 16). By this we are to under- 
stand that the Law given by Moses was in full force 
until John entered upon his mission. Then the prin- 
ciples, pertaining to the kingdom represented by Jesus, 
began to be preached. John did not represent the Law 
of Moses, but he proclaimed the ushering in of the 
new, or Christian, dispensation. His theme was Jesus, 
the Gospel, the New and Better Testament, and what 
he said prepared the people to receive the still more 
advanced teachings of Jesus. 

Jesus, though made under the Law (Gal. 4: 4), 
was the Head of a new and better system of re- 
ligion than that taught by Moses. He did not come 
to destroy the Law, but to fulfill, or to perfect, or to 
consummate it. He not only embodied, in his system, 
all the good in the Mosaic Law, but even more. He 
instructed on a much higher plane, and demanded 
a line of conduct that would excel the righteousness 
of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 5: 20). The real 
purpose of his system was finally to do away with 
the Law of Moses and to give the people the Gospel 
instead. In this connection we cite what Paul, in 
Col. 2 : 14, says about " blotting out the handwriting 
of ordinances that was against us." This means all 
the Mosaic institutions. 


The First Day of the Week. 

The doing away with the Law of Moses ultimately 
led up to doing away with the Jewish Sabbath, and 
the introducing of the resurrection day, or the first 
day of the week, instead. In fact, the recognizing 
of the resurrection day as a day of special significance 
began quite early in the history of the apostolic 
church. Referring to Mark 16 : 9, and other accounts 
in the Gospels, it will be observed that Jesus arose 
from the dead on the First Day of the week. It was 
on the evening of this day that the disciples were 
found assembled (Luke 24: 33; John 20: 19). Just 
one week later, or after eight days, counting the day 
of the first meeting, we find them together again 
(John 20: 26). 

These two meetings on separate Sunday even- 
ings, Jesus being present both times, prompted other 
similar meetings, resulting in the First Day, or Sun- 
day services becoming a fixed part of the system of 
worship during the times of the apostles. Hence 
we read of the saints at Troas meeting on the First 
Day of the week to break bread, and of Paul admon- 
ishing the members at Corinth to lay by their con- 
tributions on the same day. 

Christ's resurrection from the dead brought in a 
new order of things. As we read in Heb. 7: 12: 
" The priesthood being changed, there is made of 
necessity a change also of the law." This simply 
means, as already stated, the doing away of the 
Mosaic Law, with all its rites, ordinances and cere- 
monies. The passing of the Law meant the passing 


of the Jewish Sabbath. The Law was put out of the 
way, disannulled, and in a figure nailed to the cross, 
and went out of existence, making way for the Gos- 
pel, with higher claims, better and more advanced 
institutions, and its finer adaptation to a much broad- 
er application. All the good there was in the Old 
Law has been brought over into the new dispensation, 
and incorporated in the Gospel. And while the Sab- 
bath has been displaced by the First Day of the week 
as a day of special service, the spirit of the Sabbath 
has by no means been lost, but is incorporated in our 
Sunday, as a New Testament institution. 

Instead of keeping the Sabbath in memory of the 
completion of the creation and the departure of 
Israel from Egypt, as the Jews did, we keep the 
Lord's Day in memory of the resurrection of Jesus 
from the dead. The change, under the guidance of 
the Spirit, was made, seemingly, without any con- 
troversy, and the day soon became one of the fixed 
and eminently appropriate institutions of the New 
Testament church. 

Some Ordinances. 

Connected with the worship of the Old Dispensa- 
tion, and regulated by the law of Moses, there were 
ordinances instituted and perpetuated for spiritual 
purposes. Under the Gospel order there are also 
ordinances, but of a different and a higher type. 

Some teaching along this line is referred to by 
the Master in Matt. 28: 20. After instructing his 
apostles in regard to making disciples of all nations, 
and "baptizing them into the name of the Father, 


and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," he adds: 
" Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I 
have commanded you." The " all things " here in- 
cludes his entire system of teaching, along with the 
ordinances he instituted and enjoined. 

Paul had the institutions of the Lord's house in 
mind when he wrote the members at Corinth, saying: 
" Remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, 
as I delivered them to you" (1 Cor. 11: 2). These 
ordinances are included in what Jude (verse 3) says 
about contending " for the faith once delivered unto 
the saints." Of those converted under the preaching 
of Peter, and baptized on the day of Pentecost, it 
is said that " they continued steadfastly in the apos- 
tles' doctrine and fellowship" (Acts 2: 42). 

This should be characteristic of all those who, 
led by the Spirit, are seeking to obey the Lord in 
the all things that he has seen proper to enjoin upon 
his followers. And to this class of believers reference 
is evidently made in Rev. 22 : 14, where we have these 
words : " Blessed are they that do his commandments, 
that they may have right to the tree of life, and may 
enter in through the gates into the city." 

The Last Night. 

In former chapters we have commented on the 
ordinance of Christian baptism, the institution 
placed by the Lord and Master at the entrance of the 
church. We are now to consider certain institutions 
located in the very heart of the church and intended 
for the faithful, after they have been born into the 
family of God on earth. 


This brings us to the last night that Jesus spent 
with his apostles before his crucifixion. It was in- 
deed a memorable night ; one that never passed from 
the memories of the faithful few, and one about which 
they never ceased to write and speak. About this 
night, and the events connected with it, more has 
probably been said and written than concerning any 
other one night mentioned in the Sacred Scriptures. 
John devotes six chapters to his interesting and 
touching narrative of what was said and done, while 
the other three evangelists also devote a number of 
chapters to the same line of thought. 

It was doubtless one of those charming nights, so 
often experienced in Palestine in the spring of the 
year. It was an April evening, possibly the sixth 
day of the month. The moon was full, and flooded 
the whole land with light. All the hills and valleys 
round about the sacred city were carpeted with a 
delightful green. Every tree was in full leaf, and 
the gardens abounded in vegetables and the fields 
in waving grain. The sky may have been clear, and 
a gentle breeze stirred the balmy air, while a thousand 
stars, like heaven-appointed sentinels, looked down 
upon the night-long, transpiring events. 

The city was thronged with people, many of them 
having come from far-distant lands, prepared to take 
part in the approaching passover. Various rumors 
floated over the city. Every now and then a new and 
somewhat exciting report was started, and soon 
spread to every section. For days, Jesus, the mar- 
velous Prophet and Teacher, with a number of fol- 
lowers and many admirers, had been awing the peo- 


pie and astonishing the authorities. His teachings 
attracted and repelled until public sentiment arose 
and fell like the receding and returning waves of the 
sea. No man could withstand his wisdom, while the 
miracles he performed seemed like the work of the 
Deity, He moved among the people like a humble, 
uncrowned king, whose only purpose was to so imbue 
his followers with love, as to be a law unto them- 

This, however, was to be the Master's last night 
while in the flesh, and no one could predict what 
might happen. Still he knew what was in store for 
him, and planned his work so as to meet the con- 
ditions. These conditions will be considered as we 
pass from chapter to chapter. 

The Upper Room. 

It was probably on Thursday evening, not far from 
sundown, that Jesus sent two of his disciples, Peter 
and John, into the city, with instructions to find a 
certain upper room, by following a man bearing a 
pitcher of water. The large upper room, called the 
guest chamber, was found, and then the necessary 
preparations were made for the services of the even- 
ing (Luke 22: 8-13). In reading the different ac- 
counts of the events of the evening, without special 
care, it might appear to some that this was the even- 
ing of the Jewish passover, but such was not the 
case, as will be shown in another chapter. It was 
the evening before the passover. 

After everything had been made ready in the upper 
room, Jesus and his disciples entered. By their pres- 


ence that evening, and the events to follow, the room 
was to be made famous. This was to be the last 
meeting of the Master and his chosen few before his 
death, and must have been a most solemn occasion. 
The evening had been, by divine appointment, set 
apart for the introduction of some of the most signif- 
icant and impressive institutions ever seen by human 

Without all was excitement. Every street and 
every public place was thronged with people. They 
were there getting ready for the passover, and the 
news concerning the events of the week was passed 
around. The miracles the Master had performed, and 
the things he had been saying, from day to day, were, 
in a large measure, and among the leaders especially, 
the topics of the evening. 

Within the room all was quiet, and each disciple 
may have been wondering what was to happen. They 
had been with their Master in many meetings, but had 
never attended one like this. Here was the table 
spread with a simple meal, and all seemed to be in 
readiness to partake of the repast of the evening. 
When the hour arrived, which Jesus had in mind, he 
and the twelve took their places at the table (Luke 
22: 14), and then followed something never before 
witnessed by the disciples. 

Rite of Feet- Washing. 

In the previous chapter we left Jesus and his dis- 
ciples seated at the table, on which was the evening 
meal prepared for the occasion. We have no way of 
knowing of what the meal consisted. We know, 


however, that there was on the table bread, some 
soup, and some oriental wine, unfermented, of course, 
called the " fruit of the vine/' 

There was, probably, a moment's silence, then Jesus 
arose from the table, laid aside his loose outer gar- 
ments, girded himself with a towel, poured water 
into a basin and proceeded to wash his disciples' feet, 
and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was 
girded (John 13: 2-5). Seemingly without a word 
of explanation, he passed from one to the other. The 
disciples looked upon the act with profound amaze- 
ment. Never before had they seen or heard of the 
like. They had probably seen servants wash their 
masters' feet. They had heard of the priests wash- 
ing their own feet at the laver of brass before enter- 
ing the tabernacle (Ex. 30: 19), or had even washed 
their own feet, as was an Eastern custom (Gen. 18: 
4), but for a teacher to wash the feet of his disciples, 
or the master to wash the feet of his servants, was as 
new to them as it was astonishing. All save Peter 
quietly submitted to the act, and he, too, submitted 
after being told, " If I wash thee not, thou hast no 
part with me" (John 13: 8). Not one of them at 
first comprehended its meaning. There was nothing 
like it in the law of Moses or in the usage of the 
Jews. They were, for the time, unable to gather 
any lesson from the service. It could not be for the 
cleansing of the feet, for in that case Jesus should 
have had his own feet washed. It was a rebuke to 
their selfishness. That much they could comprehend. 
The thing itself was before them, but what could it 
irnean ! Jesus now proceeds to tell them. 


He had set them an example. He had given them 
the practical part of the lesson. This they could 
see with the eye. Then he said : " Ye call me Master 
and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am. If I then, 
your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye 
also ought to wash one another's feet, for I have 
given you an example, that ye should do as I have 
done to you" (John 13: 13-15). What they had 
been beholding with the eye, they now began to com- 
prehend. They understood that he was establishing 
a religious institution, or ordinance, to be observed 
in the assembly of the saints. In this they were con- 
firmed by what followed later in the evening. 

Before them was a lesson in a twofold form. Jesus 
had done to them the very thing he desired them to do 
to one another. Then he told them that they " ought 
to wash one another's feet." The example and the 
command, in connection with the Lord's supper and 
the communion that followed, fully confirmed them 
in what they saw and now understood. Jesus then 
explained to them that the rite of feet-washing had 
a spiritual import, for he said of their condition, 
"Ye are clean, but not all" (John 13: 10). Judas, 
being a sinner, whose heart was not in the service, 
was not clean, but the others were. They had puri- 
fied their souls in obeying the truth, and were now 
prepared, as one family, to engage in the further serv- 
ices of the hour. 

In a quiet way, they had learned a lesson of un- 
selfishness and humility. The conduct of the Master, 
in washing their feet, was a sharp rebuke to the 
selfishness they had displayed in seeking the best 3,nd 


the most honorable seats in the kingdom of God. 
Then there was the lesson in humility, — serving one 
another, in a religious institution. The lesson was so 
deeply impressed that they never got away from it. 

Feet-washing, as a religious rite, continued in the 
church during the time of the apostles. It is clearly 
mentioned in Paul's letter to Timothy, where in- 
structions are given concerning the widows to be 
taken into a special number. One qualification is 
that "if she hath washed the saints' feet" (1 Tim. 
5: 10). Having "washed the saints' feet" indicated 
a condition of great value in the estimation of Paul. 
No one should be selected for the number referred 
to who had never engaged in this sacred rite, estab- 
lished by Jesus himself. It was important that those 
who became the teachers of the younger women 
should have engaged in every good work, and the 
washing of the saints' feet was one of them. 

The simple fact that is here referred to proves 
that the practice still prevailed in the Christian church 
at the time Paul wrote his letter to Timothy. Paul 
would never have written this kind of a letter to a 
church that did not believe in washing the saints' feet 
as a religious rite. The lesson having been given by 
precept and example, was so plain that there was no 
occasion for misunderstanding it, hence it was con- 
tinued as a practice in the church, in harmony with 
the specific command of the Savior. 

The Lord's Supper. 

From John 13: 12 we learn that after Jesus had 
washed his disciples' feet, he resumed his place at 


the table. The eatables prepared for the occasion 
had remained untouched. The meal, in verse two, 
of the chapter cited, was called a " supper." It is 
said, " Supper being ended." The Revised Ver- 
sion has it : " During supper." In verse four we 
read : " He riseth from supper." In Luke 22 : 20 the 
meal is called a supper, for there we read about " the 
cup after supper." Paul bears witness to this in 
1 Cor. 11 : 25, for there, as given in the Revised Ver- 
sion, he says : " In like manner also the cup, after 

From all this we learn that there was a supper pre- 
pared for the evening. By supper is meant a regular 
evening meal. In a sense it might very properly 
have been referred to as a passover meal (Luke 22: 
15), though it was not the Jewish passover, for that 
was not celebrated until the next evening, as will be 
shown later. All leavened bread had been removed 
from the houses in Jerusalem, and everything em- 
ployed in the preparation of meals was in keeping 
with the spirit and letter of the passover regulations. 
Then Jesus was about to introduce an institution, — 
the loaf and the cup, — that would be, to his disciples, 
a passover of a greater spiritual import, and of a 
much higher type than the Mosaic passover had ever 
been to the Jews. It was a passing over, indeed, that 
justified a reference, in a figure, to the regular pass- 

It is further evident, from the scriptures cited, 
that Jesus washed the feet of his disciples before 
the supper was eaten. This is proved by what is said 
of him after he had resumed his place at the table. 


Again referring to John 13, notice in verse 18 what 
Jesus says of Judas : " He that eateth bread with me 
hath lifted up his heel against me." It was after 
this, and while still eating, that Jesus gave the sop 
to Judas (verse 26). 

And so we learn that, after Jesus had completed 
the feet-washing service, he ate an evening meal 
with his disciples, — the last meal that they, as a body, 
were ever to eat together while in the flesh. This 
meal has become historic. It is often called " the 
last supper." It is sometimes called " the feast of 
charity," in Greek, the "agape," or love feast. It 
is this meal, as a New Testament institution, that 
Paul referred to when he wrote to the members 
at Corinth, about their disorderly feast : " When 
therefore ye assemble yourselves together, it is not 
possible to eat the Lord's supper" (1 Cor. 11: 20, 
Revised Version). In the next verse he tells them 
why it was not possible, with the condition of things, 
for them to eat the Lord's supper : " For in your eat- 
ing each one taketh before other his own supper " 
(1 Cor. 11: 21, R. V.). In observing the Lord's 
supper, the members at Corinth had fallen into con- 
fusion, and for that reason Paul rebuked them. 

The sacred meal became a well-established insti- 
tution in apostolic times. In 2 Peter 2: 13, using the 
marginal reading of the Revised Version, we read 
about some unholy characters " reveling in their 
love feasts while they feast with you." In Jude 12, 
same version, we have this statement : " These are 
they who are hidden rocks in your love feasts." 
These two citations settle the question of the con- 


tinuance of the love feast. It was instituted on the 
night of the betrayal, in connection with the religious 
rite of feet-washing and the eucharist, and was re- 
tained in the church for centuries. So long as the 
church remained true to the teachings of the New 
Testament, just that long was the Lord's supper, or 
the love feast, continued. 

The Loaf and the Cup. 

At the close of the Lord's supper, or " as they did 
eat," says Mark (14: 22, 23), "Jesus took bread, and 
blessed, and brake it, and gave it to them [the dis- 
ciples], and said, Take, eat: this is my body. And he 
took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave 
it to them : and they all drank of it." Luke (22 : 19, 
20) refers to the institution of the loaf and cup in 
this manner : " And he took bread, and gave thanks, 
and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my 
body which is given for you : this do in remembrance 
of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, 
This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is 
shed for you." 

We are led to infer from these quotations, and 
what Matthew says (26: 26), that the communion 
service followed immediately after supper. Luke 
says the cup was passed " after supper." There 
were three institutions, and they were kept sufficient- 
ly separated to give each one a characteristic of its 
own. The last service, sometimes called the com- 
munion, often the eucharist, and at the~he3ti •• of . this 
chapter, "The Loaf and Cup," cpf^Sttfi of the i>le$s> , 
ing, passing and partaking of 'the sacrei * 'emblems! <i 



representing the body and blood of the Master. Of 
the three services for the evening, the other two being 
preparatory steps, this must be regarded as the more 
sacred and the more impressive. 

It will be observed that, while Jesus instituted the 
loaf and the cup on the same evening on which he 
instituted the Lord's supper, the one, in no sense, 
can take the place of the other. The Lord's supper 
has its distinct place, and is followed by the commun- 
ion service. This being true, it is a mistake to call the 
loaf and cup the Lord's supper. They are never so 
designated in any part of the Holy Scriptures. 

We have seen, as Luke says, that the cup was 
passed after supper, and was therefore no part of the 
evening meal. Paul, in 1 Cor. 11:25, as given in the 
Revised Version, says the cup was passed after sup- 
per. The testimony of these two writers places the 
question beyond controversy. It must, therefore, be 
regarded as a settled fact, that the communion service, 
as an institution, while associated with the Lord's 
supper, must not be confounded with it. Of itself 
it is not a supper, in any sense, and we need not 
wonder that the sacred writers refused to call it a 
supper. It takes more than a small bit of bread and 
a sip of the fruit of the vine to constitute a meal of 
any type. 

The testimony of Luke, John and Paul makes 
it clear that there was a supper eaten on the occasion. 
The Greek word for this repast is deipnon, which 
means the regular evening meal, often the principal 
meal of the day. The evidence given by Luke and 
Paul, as already cited, makes it equally clear that the 


sacred emblems, representing the body and blood of 
the Master, were not partaken of until after this sup- 
per was completed, and must therefore be regarded 
as a distinct institution. The custom of calling these 
emblems the Lord's supper has led to the confusion 
which now exists. 

There is no more ground for calling the loaf and 
cup the Lord's supper than there is for calling sprin- 
kling and pouring baptism. The Lord's supper is a 
complete meal, just as much as baptism is a complete 

An Evening Service. 

We have no way of knowing at what hour Jesus 
met with his disciples in the upper room, but we do 
know that " when the even was come he sat down 
with the twelve" (Matt. 26: 20). Mark (14: 17) 
says, " In the evening he cometh with the twelve." 
Paul declares that " the Lord Jesus the same night 
in which he was betrayed took bread " ( 1 Cor. 1 1 : 
23). This statement is confirmed by John's account 
of the feet-washing service and the Lord's supper. 
Jesus having handed the sop to Judas, the narrative 
says : " He then having received the sop went imme- 
diately out, and it was night" (John 13: 30). 

All of this gives us to understand that the Lord's 
supper, as well as the communion, was first celebrated 
in the evening. As regards the Lord's supper, it 
would be entirely out of place at any other time of 
the day, for supper is an evening and not a noonday 
meal. Being characterized by the time of its institu- 


tion, the evening would seem the only appropriate 
time for its observance. 

Regarding the practice which prevailed in the time 
of the apostles, we get some light from Acts 20: 7, 
where we find this statement about a feast at Troas : 
" And upon the first day of the week, when the dis- 
ciples came together to break bread, Paul preached 
unto them, ready to depart on the morrow ; and con- 
tinued his speech until midnight/' The members at 
Troas came together on the first day of the week, that 
is, on Sunday evening, for the purpose of holding a 
love feast. The breaking of bread here includes the 
whole love feast service. We say they met on Sun- 
day evening, for it is said that Paul preached until 
midnight. This can be accounted for only on the 
ground that the preaching began in the evening. 

At midnight the services were interrupted by a 
young man, in his sleep, falling from the third floor. 
Paul went down, administered to the young man, re- 
turned to the audience, and the services relating to 
the feast were completed. While the members may 
have intended to hold their feast on Sunday evening, 
so as to have Paul, who was to leave the next morn- 
ing, with them; still the services were actually de- 
ferred until the early hours of Monday, the feast 
being near midnight. 

It will be noticed that the first feast ever held was 
probably on Thursday evening. This was in the 
upper room in Jerusalem. The second one of which 
we have a special account was held in the upper 
room at Troas, early on Monday morning. Since 
one feast was held on Thursday, and the other one 


on Monday, it must be evident that no one day in 
the week was considered more appropriate than any 
any other day. Any day is a suitable day for the love 
feast; it should, however, be held in the evening. 
The communion should also be celebrated in the even- 
ing. It was instituted in the evening, and was to have 
been observed at Troas in the evening, but was de- 
layed until a later hour. 

In the Scriptures we have not the remotest hint 
that the supper was ever observed at a noon service. 
It is, by nature and origin, an evening institution, and 
by all the early Christians was so regarded. The 
Christians of the first centuries may have fallen into 
some errors, but they never went so far as to at- 
tempt to convert this special evening ordinance into 
a noon hour service. 

Before the Passover. 

We now proceed to show, as promised, that the 
religious rite of feet-washing, the Lord's supper and 
the eucharist, were instituted the evening before the 
legal time for the Jews to celebrate their passover. 
This we shall do in a brief way, though it is a ques- 
tion over which there has been more or less contro- 
versy among theologians. 

Among the Jews the day began at sundown, and 
ended at sundown. It was probably not far from 
sundown, or Thursday afternoon, which would be the 
beginning of the fourteenth of the month Nisan, or the 
first day of unleavened bread, when the disciples 
asked Jesus : " Where wilt thou that we prepare for 
thee to eat the passover ? " He told them what to do, 


and it is said that " they made ready the passover " 
(Matt. 26: 17-19). Luke says it was "the day of 
unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed " 
(Luke 22: 7). Remember that the day did not end 
until the next evening, hence it could well be said 
that it was the day on which " the passover must be 
killed." It was killed on that very day, that is, about 
twenty-one hours after Jesus told his disciples to 
prepare the passover. 

After receiving their instructions concerning the 
preparation of the passover, the two disciples went 
to the proper parties and contracted for a lamb to be 
delivered, as the custom was, at the upper room which 
they had engaged. This done, they arranged for sup- 
per, and later Jesus came with his disciples. On this 
occasion, as shown in previous chapters, Jesus in- 
stituted feet-washing, the Lord's supper and the com- 
munion. All of this was on the fourteenth day of 
Nisan, the day of unleavened bread, or the day on 
which the passover must be killed. When the services 
were completed, late on Thursday evening, Jesus went 
to the Garden of Gethsemane, where he was ar- 
rested, was tried the next morning, and nailed to the 
cross at nine o'clock. At three in the afternoon he 
expired. This was still on the fourteenth day. At 
three o'clock the priests, as was their custom, com- 
menced killing the passover lambs in the temple. 
These lambs were then roasted and eaten that even- 
ing, after sundown, which would place the eating on 
the fifteenth day of the month. All of this agrees 
with what is said about the Jews refusing to enter 
" the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled, but 


that they might eat the passover" (John 18: 28). 
In the old Syriac Version we have this rendering: 
" Lest they should defile themselves before they had 
eaten the passover." 

From this we learn, as a matter of fact, that the 
Jews had not yet celebrated the passover when Jesus, 
early on Friday morning, was on trial before Pilate. 
This harmonizes perfectly with what John (13: 1) 
says about the feet-washing service taking place " be- 
fore the feast of the passover." The view here pre- 
sented shows a complete harmony between the state- 
ments made by the different evangelists. 

In celebrating the passover festival, it was cus- 
tomary to remove all leaven from the houses, and in 
other ways make preparation for the feast, on the 
fourteenth day of the month Abib. Therefore the 
day became known as " the day of preparation," or 
sometimes as " the preparation." In Matt. 27 : 62 
the day on which Jesus was crucified is called " the 
day of preparation." Mark 15: 42, Luke 23: 54, 
and John 19: 14, 31, 42 say that the crucifixion took 
place on the preparation day. And since that is the 
day on which the passover was killed, to be eaten 
after sundown, in the beginning of the day that fol- 
lowed, it is evident that Jesus must have met with his 
disciples in the upper room on the evening before 
the legal time for eating the passover. This argument 
ought to be considered conclusive. 

And since it is clear that feet-washing, the Lord's 
supper and the loaf and the cup were instituted in 
the upper room, the evening before the legal time for 
eating the passover, it becomes evident that these 


services sustain no relation whatever to the Mosaic 
system of religion. They are purely Christian, and 
belong to the Christian dispensation, as surely as 
the passover service belongs to the dispensation of 
the Law. Nor do these institutions take the place of 
the passover. They were, at the time, new institu- 
tions, established on purpose for the church of Jesus 
Christ, and it becomes his faithful followers to see 
that they are continued in all good faith. 

Feet- Washing in History. 

In previous chapters we have shown that feet- 
washing, as a religious rite, was commanded by Christ 
when he told his disciples that they " ought to wash 
one another's feet." The language enjoining the rite 
is certainly plain enough. 

But how did the apostles understand the com- 
mand? John was probably eighty years old when 
he wrote his Gospel, which contains all that is re- 
corded concerning feet-washing as practiced, ex- 
plained and enjoined by Jesus. If the ordinance was 
of no consequence, in the estimation of John, it seems 
strange that he, so late in life, should have made such 
a careful record of its introduction by the Master, 
and the very careful and guarded language employed 
in connection with the service. 

The omission of any special reference to the serv- 
ice in the Gospels prepared by the other New Tes- 
tament writers, need not be cited as proof that the 
rite was disregarded by the early churches estab- 
lished by the apostles. Since the service was gen- 
erally observed, they may have deemed it unneces- 


sary to say anything about it. But John thought oth- 
erwise, so he gives a careful account of the service, 
stating how the rite was introduced and the lan- 
guage employed to enjoin it. 

Reference has already been made to the washing 
of the " saints' feet/' as given in 1 Tim. 5 : 10, show- 
ing that the rite was still practiced at that time, about 
A. D. 65. There is no reasonable way of account- 
ing for this, except on the ground that the feet-wash- 
ing, enjoined by the Master, and recorded in the 
thirteenth chapter of John, was a common practice 
among the churches, and was required of all the 
faithful members. 

History has some bearing on the question, and there 
may be much more history than has yet been brought 
together in any one volume. Dr. Cave says that the 
practice was frequently observed in the primitive 
church. Tertullian, who lived in the third century, 
refers to it a few times. It is also mentioned by 
Clement of Alexandria, as w r ell as by Irenaeus. Cyp- 
rian also makes mention of the practice. Bing- 
ham, a church historian of note, says that the rite 
was abrogated by one of the Spanish councils about 
the seventh century. 

The Waldensians, a very ancient sect, observed 
the rite of feet-washing with great care and rever- 
ence. The congregations in the Piedmont Valley and 
elsewhere, that gave rise to this religious order, 
maintained that they could trace the organization of 
their church to the time of the apostles. It would 
seem that among them the rite of feet-washing, as a 
religious sacrament, had been handed down, from one 


generation to another, from remote Christian antiq- 

Dr. Schaff refers to Augustine, an early church his- 
torian, who says that in his day feet-washing took 
place on Thursday before Easter. In the year 694 
A. D., the synod of Toledo excluded from the com- 
munion table those who refused to have their feet 
washed on that day. See " SchafF-Herzog Encyclo- 
pedia/' page 823. From this we may well infer that 
feet-washing, in some form, was a common prac- 
tice, and was so continued until it was, in course of 
time, set aside by the Catholics, as stated by Bing- 

In Godfried Arnold's celebrated " History of the 
Primitive Christians," book III, chapter 2, the fol- 
lowing may be found : " Among the services or duties 
which were observed by the first Christians, that of 
feet-washing was included." 

There probably has never been a time, since the 
enjoining of the rite by Jesus, when feet-washing, 
as a religious duty, has not been practiced by one 
or more Christian bodies. We trace the practice 
from the apostles to Tertullian, then to Augustine, 
then to the Waldensians, and to the time of the Ref- 
ormation. The Moravians, a body coming out of the 
Reformation, practiced the rite until 1818, when it 
was abolished by a synod. A number of Christian 
bodies still practice the rite, and among them none 
figure more conspicuously than the Church of the 
Brethren. It is also a matter of encouragement to 
know that the ordinance is still regularly observed 
in Jerusalem, where it was first instituted. 


History and the Lord's Supper. 

The Lord's supper, or the agape, holds an im- 
portant place in church history. The rite was insti- 
tuted by Jesus in the upper room, on the night of his 
betrayal, and was continued through the entire apos- 
tolic age. This is evidenced by what may be found 
in 2 Peter 2: 13, and in Jude 12. Dr. Adam Clarke, 
a commentator of recognized scholarship, comment- 
ing on Jude 12, says : " The feasts of charity, or love 
feasts, of which the apostle speaks, were in use in 
the primitive church till the middle of the fourth 
century, when, by the council of Laodicea, they were 
prohibited to be held in the churches, and having 
been abused, fell into disuse." Benson, commenting 
on what Peter says, makes this statement : " These 
previous suppers, it appears from Jude, verse 12, 
were called agapce, love-feasts: because the rich, by 
feasting their poor brethren, express their love to 

We shall not give much space to quotations, but 
will let a few extracts and citations suffice. Dr. 
Schaff, a profound scholar, and a fine church his- 
torian, in his " Church History," Vol. II, page 239, 
says: " At first the communion was joined with a love 
feast, and was then celebrated in the evening, in 
memory of the last supper of Jesus with his disciples." 
Taking up the same subject, at a later period, the 
author, in Vol. Ill, page 402, adds this : " Next fol- 
lowed Maundy Thursday, in commemoration of the 
institution of the Holy Supper, which, on this day, 
was observed in the evening, and was usually con- 


nected with a love feast, and also with feet-washing." 
It may be interesting to note what Mosheim, the 
church historian, has to say in Vol. I, page 197, con- 
cerning the early practice. He says : " The expres- 
sion, ' to break bread/ when it occurs in the Acts 
of the Apostles, is, for the most part, to be under- 
stood as signifying the celebration of the Lord's Sup- 
per, in which bread was broken and distributed. We 
are not, however, to consider it as exclusively refer- 
ring to this ordinance of our Savior, but as also 
implying that feast of love, of which it was the cus- 
tomary practice of the Christians, even from the 
very first, always at the same time to partake." 

At this point it is very satisfactory to turn to the 
word agape, in " Brown's Dictionary of the Holy 
Bible/' and quote the following: "This [agape] is 
a Greek word, and signifies properly ' friendship/ 
The feasts of charity, which were in use in the prim- 
itive church, were called by this name. They were 
celebrated in memory of the last supper which Jesus 
Christ made with his apostles, when he instituted 
the Eucharist. These festivals were kept in the 
church toward the evening, after the common prayers 
were over, and the word of salvation had been heard. 
When this was done, the faithful ate together, with 
great simplicity and union, what every man had 
brought them ; so that the rich and the poor were in 
no wise distinguished. After an economical and 
moderate supper, they partook of the Lord's body and 
blood, and gave each other the kiss of peace." 

This feast of charity, or love feast, is mentioned 
by Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Ignatius, 


Tertullian, Chrysostom, Origen and others of the 
early centuries. It continued as the common practice 
of the church nearly all over Christendom until the 
council of Laodicea (A. D. 363) and Carthage (392), 
when it was decided to drop the love feast altogether 
and celebrate the communion alone. Most churches 
fell in with the recommendations of these councils, 
but when the Brethren began their reformatory work 
in Germany, in 1708, they restored the Lord's supper, 
of the apostolic times, to the church, and they have 
reduced this service, in connection with feet-washing 
and the communion, to a system which, for simplicity 
and impressiveness, is probably unexcelled in the re- 
ligious world. 

Not as a matter of testimony, but as a suitable 
paragraph for the closing of this chapter, we take 
pleasure in quoting the following from Bro. James 
Quinter, commenting on the Lord's supper : 

" In celebrating the Lord's supper, in the light in 
which we view it, while the sacred emblems, the bread 
and wine, representing the body and blood of the 
Savior, remind us of his death for us, and point us to 
his second coming, this feast of love may be regarded 
as a representation of the great marriage supper of 
the Lamb, which is to take place when the Savior 
comes, and his people shall gather themselves together 
from the east, and from the west, and from the 
north, and from the south, and sit down in the king- 
dom of God. O my friends, do not believe that any- 
thing commanded by the Lord is a mere formality. 
If it be sustained that a thing is of the Lord, it can 
not but be admitted that it must have good effects, 


if properly observed. And in this ordinance, this 
feast of charity, we find there is a power, there is a 
benefit, there is a utility; and for these reasons, — 
because we believe it to be commanded by the Lord, 
and because we have practically seen and felt its 
beneficial effects, — we contend for its observance in 
accordance with the custom of the apostolic church. 
I believe that in all things, the more closely we ad- 
here to the practices of the apostolic church, the 
better. And if this is to be our model, then we must 
have a feast of charity; we must have something else 
that we can eat together besides the sacred emblems 
of the communion." 

Close Communion. 

The communion service, as provided for in the 
New Testament, is for those of like precious faith. 
Paul says in 2 Cor. 13: 5, "Examine yourselves, 
whether ye be in the faith." And in 1 Cor. 1 1 : 28 
it is said : " Let a man examine himself, and so let 
him eat of that bread and drink of that cup." 

Self-examination, before partaking of the sacred 
emblems, is as much of a duty as the service itself, 
and should one be so unmindful of his duty, in this 
particular, as to attempt to approach the Lord's table, 
without the scriptural qualifications, the church, in 
the interest of harmony and consistency, would have 
a right to object. 

Membership in the body of Christ is well defined. 
Only those who have entered the kingdom by way 
of the new birth, — " born of water and of the Spir- 
it," — are entitled to a place at the Lord's table. The 


communion is strictly a Christian service, and while 
it may be celebrated openly, it can not be regarded 
as a wide-open service. 

There can be no communion without sufficient 
union, harmony and oneness, to enable the participants 
to work together in the house of God. This is pos- 
sible only for the Christian body that recognizes one 
Lord, one faith, one baptism, one Spirit and one 
order of service. People who are not of a sufficient 
oneness to worship, work, and keep the ordinances 
together, can not, with any degree of consistency, 
commune together. 

To illustrate, the Brethren observe the three sac- 
raments, — feet-washing, Lord's supper, and com- 
munion, — as they were instituted by the Master in 
the upper room. It would be the gravest piece of in- 
consistency for one, who does not believe in observ- 
ing the religious rites of feet- washing and the Lord's 
supper, to ask the privilege of occupying a place at 
the Lord's table at the communion service. And since 
this is apparent to every one who has given the matter 
the least consideration, it follows that there are no 
legitimate grounds, from the Brethren's viewpoint, 
for the open communion. 

Not only so, but the open communion practice 
would compel members to commune with those whom 
we would not think of fellowshiping in the church. 
The practice would open the way for members of 
secret societies, those engaged in war, those divorced 
contrary to the Gospel, those bedecked in the sinful 
fashions of the world, those engaged in unholy pur- 
suits, and even the unbaptized, to sit with us at the 


Lord's tables. Not only so, but it would pave the 
way for the saloonkeeper, if he should be a member 
of another church, to commune with the most devout 
of saints. 

And last, as an objection, open communion would 
virtually rob the church of her discipline, or cripple 
her in its application. A member commits a grave 
offense and has to be disfellowsniped. He unites 
with another church, and when his former church 
holds a love feast, and extends an invitation to all 
persons in good standing in other churches, he, in his 
unreconciled condition, can come forward and com- 
mune with the very people who refused to retain 
him in fellowship. We would say by our own action fc 
in expelling the man, that he is not a fit subject to be 
a member of the church, and yet, according to the 
rule of open communion, he would have a right to 
go with the saints to the Lord's table. 

Such a practice would render the church powerless 
in any matter of discipline. She might pass on the 
fitness of those who unite with her body, but can 
not pass on the fitness of those who, with her own 
members, would break bread together. The incon- 
sistency of the whole situation should settle the ques- 

Obeying From the Heart. 

In Rom. 6: 17 we read about obeying from the 
heart that form of doctrine, or teaching, whereunto 
the saints at Rome were delivered (Revised Version). 
From this we learn that the members at Rome not 
only obeyed the doctrine that had been taught them, 


but they also held to the form. With them there was 
no such a thing as doctrine without form. We fur- 
ther observe that they obeyed from the heart. By 
this we are to understand that with them obeying the 
form of doctrine was a heart service. The hearts 
of the saints were in what they did. They believed 
in Jesus Christ, accepted what had been taught them, 
and obeyed the Gospel with a perfect heart. 

The form of doctrine was external, — something 
that could be seen. To observe the form, was to obey 
the Written Word, — to do what the Word called for. 
But these saints worshiped God in spirit, as well as 
in truth. To them external acts became spiritual. Put- 
ting their hearts and souls into what the Lord would 
have them do, was to obey from the heart. By this 
heart service a deep work of grace was wrought in 
the soul. It was not mere external obedience, but 
heart obedience as well. Or, as Paul further says, 
it was " doing the will of God from the heart " (Eph. 
6: 6). True obedience would have back of it the 
" hidden man of the heart," and when this is the 
case, there can be no question about God accepting 
the service. 

Jesus says, in John 14: 23, "If any man love me, 
he will keep my words." In the estimation of the 
Master, love settles the question of obedience. The 
man who loves Jesus will obey from the heart the 
New Testament form of doctrine. He will study 
the Scriptures for the purpose of learning what his 
Master would have him do, and on learning his duty 
will not hesitate a moment about doing it. Only 
when prompted by pure motives, can one render ac- 


ccptable heart service. This requires a clean heart, 
and for this reason David would have the Lord to 
create in him a " clean heart," and renew within him 
a "right spirit" (Psa. 51: 10). Obeying from the 
heart implies a clean heart, a pure heart, a loving 
heart, and a willing heart. 

Every duty, set forth in the Scriptures, and every 
obligation, laid upon man, should be regarded as a 
heart service. And when this becomes true of one 
it can well be said of him that his heart is right. 
The heart is right because of the pure motive in do- 
ing the things that are right. Of Amaziah, the king, 
it is recorded that " he did that which was right in 
the sight of the Lord, but not with a perfect heart " 
(2 Chron. 25: 2). There is such a thing as keeping 
the ordinances, or obeying any of the commandments, 
relating to external duties, without a perfect heart. 
One may have the form without the Spirit, or he may 
go through the performance of a duty and not have 
his heart in what he is doing, or may not be prompted 
by pure motives. Merely to comply with the letter 
of the Gospel, the legalist may do what is right in 
the sight of the Lord, and yet lack the love that 
renders obedience effective. It might be said of such 
a one that he did just what the New Testament re- 
quired of him, but not with a perfect heart. 

While we mean, in this treatise, to place special 
emphasis on the importance of teaching, believing 
and obeying the whole Gospel, we wish to impress, 
with additional emphasis, the importance of serving 
God with a perfect heart, and without this perfect 


heart service we certainly can not claim the promised 

Where the Merit Comes In. 

Ordinances are in no sense meritorious. That is, 
they possess no purchasing or earning power. There 
is nothing in an ordinance, or even in good works, for 
that matter, serving as an equivalent for blessings 
received. We merit a thing only when we earn it, 
or in some way render a service that is its equivalent. 
The soldier who defends his country in battle, and 
endures the hardships of a military life, is said to 
merit his pay as well as the bounty offered by his 
government. His children may share with him in 
these blessings, but they do not merit them. Our 
merit is in Christ, who has paid the purchase price 
of our salvation, " which he purchased with his own 
blood" (Acts 20: 28). By his death upon the cross 
he paid the price of our eternal redemption, taking 
away the sin of the world, and we are therefore free 
in Christ Jesus. 

While we may affirm that ordinances are in no 
sense meritorious, it is not to be understood that obey- 
ing them is not essential to the blessings promised. 
Naaman was told to dip himself in Jordan seven times 
and he should be healed of his leprosy. The act was 
performed, and the blessing immediately followed. 

There was nothing in the act which entitled Naa- 
man to the blessing, nevertheless the blessing was re- 
ceived. The blessing was a free gift from the Lord, 
unmerited in any sense whatever. While Naaman 
did just as he was commanded, still there was no 


purchasing or earning power in the act he performed. 
No equivalent was rendered for the benefits received. 
Naaman, by his obedience, simply placed himself in 
a condition to receive the blessing promised. 

In the salvation of ths human family, Jesus settled 
the account. It was his death upon the cross that 
paid the debt. He therefore purchased us with his 
own precious blood. In him, and by him, is all the 
merit pertaining to our salvation. By his death, 
Jesus merited our salvation, — he purchased and paid 
for it in full, — leaving nothing whatever for us to 
pay. He now tenders this salvation to every child 
of Adam's race as a free and absolutely unencum- 
bered gift. He simply asks us, as a favor, to place 
ourselves in a condition to receive it. 

This gift, or favor, or blessing, or grace, comes to 
us in two parts. First, the pardon of all past sins. 
Second, eternal life and happiness in the world to 
come. It is through him, and by him, that all this is 
secured. In order that our sins may be pardoned, 
he asks us to believe on his name, repent of our sins 
and submit to Christian baptism into the name of the 
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. By 
doing these things we will come within reach of the 
blessing he has paid for with his own blood, while 
we receive it as a free, unmerited gift. Of us it 
can then well be said, " By grace are ye saved." 

The second part, or salvation in heaven, is promised 
solely to those who remain faithful until death. And 
in order that faithfulness may rest upon a proper 
basis, certain duties are set forth, with which every 
Christian is required to comply. Some of these duties 


we have been considering in the preceding chapters. 
Others are yet to be considered. And while there is 
no merit attached to the performance of any of these 
duties, still they test the loyalty of those to whom 
the blessing of eternal life has been promised. Let it 
be borne in mind that Jesus " became the author of 
eternal salvation unto all them that obey him " (Heb. 
5:9). Christ has provided eternal life for all, yet 
he intends to bestow it upon those alone who obey 
him, and not upon those who refuse obedience. It 
thus becomes a free gift to the obedient, not that it 
is merited, but because it is of grace to all who, by 
faith and obedience, place themselves within reach of 
the blessing. 

The Christian Greeting. 

The kiss was early adopted as the method of greet- 
ing in the church of Christ. Paul gave the members 
at Rome this instruction : " Salute one another with 
a holy kiss." Then he added : " The churches of 
Christ salute you" (Rom. 16: 16). This would 
come marvelously near including all the churches. Of 
the members at Rome, the apostle at one time said: 
" Your faith is spoken of throughout the whole 
world" (Rom. 1:8). We may rest assured that 
saints, who had this well-deserved reputation, would 
not fail to follow the instructions given them. 

The same instructions were sent to the churches 
at Corinth and Thessalonica. In fact, the members 
at Corinth were twice reminded of their duty in this 
particular, the apostles using almost the same words 
in both instances : " Greet ye one another with an 


holy kiss" (1 Cor. 16: 20; 2 Cor. 13: 12). To the 
Thessalonians he wrote : " Greet all the brethren with 
an holy kiss" (1 Thess. 5: 26). Paul, however, 
was not alone in insisting on the kiss as the Chris- 
tian greeting. Peter did the same thing in this form : 
" Greet ye one another with a kiss of charity " ( 1 
Peter 5: 14). 

It will be observed that, while Paul calls the greet- 
ing a holy kiss, Peter calls it a kiss of charity. By 
holy kiss is meant a kiss consecrated or set apart for 
a holy purpose. Just following the verse, containing 
his instructions to the members at Thessalonica, re- 
garding the salutation, Paul has this : " I charge you 
by the Lord that this epistle be read unto all the holy 
brethren" (1 Thess. 5: 27). This should indicate 
to us that the holy kiss is intended for the " holy 
brethren," — for the people who have been dedicated 
and consecrated to the Lord. It is also a kiss of love. 
This is what Peter means by the term " kiss of chari- 

There is not a plainer command in all the New 

Testament, and the language enjoining it is too clear 
to be misunderstood. Furthermore, it was not mis- 
understood by the early Christians. In Acts 20: 27 
we read about the elders at Ephesus falling on the 
neck of Paul and kissing him. Then the kiss was 
continued in the church for centuries. On this point 
all ancient ecclesiastical history is a unit. When 
brethren of the same faith met, they saluted each other 
with the holy kiss, or the kiss of love, as it is often 
called. When the sisters met they greeted each other 


in like manner, proper decorum, at all times, being 
duly observed between the sexes. 

As a token of the highest order of love, the greeting 
enjoined by Paul and Peter, who wrote as they were 
prompted by the Holy Spirit, should still be con- 
tinued. The kiss of charity has the New Testament 
back of it, and there is no more reason for setting 
it aside than there is for neglecting any other divine- 
ly-recognized duty. So long as brethren love one an- 
other, and so long as they strive for holiness in the 
Lord, just that long should they greet each other with 
a holy kiss, or the kiss of charity. 


Those who have become truly regenerated, and are 
new creatures in Christ Jesus, having " put off the 
old man with his deeds," and " put on the new man, 
which is renewed in knowledge" (Col. 3: 9, 10), will 
show by the life they live that they are not of this 
world, and will therefore not conform to the evil 
ways of the world. They prefer to conform their 
lives to the teachings of their Master, rather than to 
pattern after the ways of the unconverted. 

Speaking on the subject of nonconformity, Paul in 
Rom. 12: 2 says: "Be not conformed to this world: 
but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, 
that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, 
and perfect, will of God." The Revised Version has 
this rendering : " Be not fashioned according to this 
world," or according to this " age," as it stands in 
the margin. While this transformation is brought 
about by the renewing of the mind, it nevertheless 


relates itself to every phase of the new and conse- 
crated life. It applies to character, methods of doing 
business, attending places of amusement and other 
places wholly unbecoming the Christian profession, 
as well as places of residence, houses of worship, oc- 
cupations and even the clothing that is worn. 

Along all these lines the ideals of the world are 
modeled, not after the ideals that elevate, refine and 
purify, but after those that degrade. The follower 
of Christ is not to fashion his life after worldly 
models. When he renounced Satan with all his per- 
nicious ways, and put on Christ in baptism, he turned 
his back to the world, and it is therefore but proper, 
as well as logical, that he should, by his manner of 
life, show that he is a new man, seeking higher and 
better ideals than those offered by the world. This 
should lead to a transformation sufficiently distinct to 
enable Christians to be living epistles, " known and 
read of all men" (2 Cor. 3: 2). They should be 
known by their manner of living, their dealings with 
their fellow-men and with one another, by the evils 
they shun, the good deeds they do, and by their well- 
studied efforts to avoid the things that have even 
the appearance of evil. Their character and de- 
portment in life, in the interest of nonconformity, 
ought to be well enough defined to mark them as a 
separate people. 

Were this done, there would be little occasion for 
defining the Christian's metes and bounds in any de- 
partment of life. Instead of falling in with the mis- 
leading ways of the unconverted, they would seek the 
ways that are higher and better. Instead of being 



influenced by the cravings, the greed, the lust, the ex- 
travagance, and amusements of the unrighteous, they 
would rise to a higher plane of living, and labor to 
influence others for good. 

Instead of being led astray by the vain, extravagant 
and unreasonable fashions of the age, they ought to 
study how they may avoid all these evils and yet se- 
cure for themselves and others all the comforts and 
benefits, generally, that well-selected clothing may af- 
ford. Instead of fashioning themselves like the un- 
regenerated, let them choose for themselves clothing 
that is modest, comfortable and healthful. Instead 
of the world setting examples for the Christian along 
this or any other line, let the Christian take the lead, 
and set a good example for the world. This is true 
nonconformity. It means a transformation that is 
sensible, reasonable, logical, scientific, and stands for 
something that is worth while. 

Modest Attire. 

Even in his day, when there were no great clothing 
trusts to dictate the fashions, Peter deemed it wise 
to say something regarding Christian attire. While 
the adorning of women is directly named, still what 
he says will, in principle, apply to men as well. We 
quote from 1 Peter 3: 3, 4: "Whose adorning let it 
not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, 
and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel ; 
But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which 
is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and 
quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great 


Peter does not stand alone in insisting on the modest 
attire for Christian women. Paul comes to his sup- 
port with the following instructions : " In like manner 
also that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, 
with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided 
hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array ; but (which be- 
cometh women professing godliness) with good 
works " (1 Tim. 2: 9, 10). By "modest apparel" is 
meant that which stands for modesty, comfort and 
economy. Taste is by no means forbidden, for one 
may show the very best of taste in selecting plain 

The idea of both writers is to discourage the use 
of any article of attire worn merely for adornment or 
display. This includes jewelry of every class, as 
well as feathers, flounces, ruffles and all display trim- 
mings. But it does not prohibit that which is neat, 
tidy, tasteful and fitting. Plain and modest clothing, 
such as becometh holy men and women, is the burden 
of the lesson, and those who do not heed the teach- 
ings of the apostles on this subject are guilty of vio- 
lating just that much of the Word of God. 

The New Testament religion is a plain, sensible, 
reasonable religion. Its purpose is to develop a body 
of people noted for their simplicity, loyalty and good 
common sense. The teachings of Paul and Peter on 
the dress question comes within these limits. This is 
the conclusion, regarding the attire, that has been 
reached by the most devout, and the best thinkers 
of Christendom. In their writings and teachings 
they stand for plain dressing and oppose that which is 
immodest, extravagant and worn for mere display. 


These are days when fashion rules. Fashions, 
from year to year, are regulated by a well-organized 
system. In deciding what people should wear this 
year, next year, or in other years to come, no account 
whatever is taken of economy, comfort, consistency, 
or even modesty. Even health must be sacrificed for 
what may be considered fashionable. The purpose, 
from start to finish, is display. In the field of industry 
the aim is to improve machinery from year to year. 
Men dispense with old machinery, or old tools, in 
order that, in purchasing the new, they may secure 
something that is better. Not so in changing the 
styles. There is no thought of placing on the market 
something better than has been worn. The ruling 
thought is something different, regardless of physical, 
mental or spiritual consequences. 

Not only so, but the people who originate styles, 
and dictate what should be worn, are not Christians. 
They do not plan for the converted, but for the un- 
converted. The aim is to make worldly people still 
more worldly. The Christian man or the Christian 
woman who falls in with the ever-changing styles, is 
simply lining up with the ungodly. Furthermore, 
those who fall in with these styles never dress plainly. 
They make no attempt to conform to the ideal in at- 
tire, recommended by the two apostles whom we have 
quoted. What they say is ignored, while what is rec- 
ommended by the managers of the styles is given 
more consideration than they would ever think of 
giving the Gospel. 

The church that would measure up to the principles 
of simplicity, laid down in the New Testament, can 


not afford to overlook the importance of teaching and 
insisting on plain, modest and becoming attire for 
men and women. The church that neglects this duty 
is simply permitting pride to play havoc with the 
spirituality that should characterize the humble and 
devout followers of the meek and lowly Jesus. 

A few generations ago many of the churches were 
plain. The members believed in simplicity and the 
ministers taught and insisted on plainness with a zeal 
worthy of the cause they represented. But in most 
of them the leaders of fashions gained the ascendency, 
and today there is not the first mark of distinction 
between the unconverted and the church members. 
The condition is deplorable. It simply means the 
quenching of the Spirit, the departure of simplicity 
and the installing of worldliness. There are only a 
few more plain churches left, and pride is making its 
inroads into their ranks. Shall they surrender their 
claims in the interest of New Testament plainness, 
or will they stand by this part of the Gospel? Our 
prayer is, — and let it be the prayer of every devout 
reader, — that the plain churches may continue to stand 
for plainness, modesty and reason in the Christian 

Principles and Methods. 

This may be as good a place as any for a chapter 
in which more may be said on principles and methods 
than could be given in the chapter on " Our Creed." 
Principles relate to things that are fundamental in 
character. They are of God, and are therefore fixed, 
and not subject to change. They may be discovered, 


but can not be originated. They are intended for all 
ages, places, races and climes. On them the seal of 
God has been set, and with them men may not trifle. 
It becomes the duty of all men, in every age, to recog- 
nize principles, and bow in submission to their de- 
mands. They dare not neglect or attempt to set them 
aside. Back of them is God, and they are here to stay. 

Methods are sometimes designated as principles in 
operation. Methods are the means devised for car- 
rying out principles. Some of them may be of God, 
and others may have no higher authority than that of 
man. But as a rule, methods are creatures of cir- 
cumstances and conditions, and subject to change. 
The same authority that brings a method into ex- 
istence, has a right to change, amend, or abrogate 
it. But methods have their place in the economy of 
grace, and while worthy of the highest consideration 
of man, should not be elevated to the dignity of prin- 

To illustrate: The religious rite of feet- washing, 
as set forth in John 13, is a principle. It is of God, 
and enjoined upon all the faithful. As a Heaven-au- 
thorized institution, it may not be trifled with by men 
or angels. But there are methods for carrying out 
the principle, or institution, and these methods, once 
put into operation, become to us the institution itself. 
And while this is true, methods are subject to modi- 
fication. The rite may be performed in an upper 
room, or in any other room, for that matter. One 
may wash and another may wipe, or one may wipe 
the feet he washes, though the latter seems more in 
keeping with the example. All of these are methods, 


and while being duly respected, they must not be 
looked upon as principles. We may regulate our 
methods, but we dare not introduce methods that will 
eliminate the principle. The principle, in this case, 
was set in the church to stay. 

Principles and methods apply in a special way to 
the subject of Christian attire, as treated in the pre- 
vious chapter. Plainness is a principle. It belongs 
to the fundamentals of the Gospel, and is intended 
for all races in every age and clime. But it must be 
borne in mind that the principle, in the domain of 
plainness, is one thing, while the method of carrying 
out that principle is quite another. The principle is 
fixed. It is settled. It is not even a debatable ques- 
tion. Not so with a given method. That may be 
changed, or substituted for something else. But the 
method or methods adopted must not be of such 
a character as to minimize or set aside the principle. 
The principle must be maintained at all hazards. 

In the time of the apostles there seems to have been 
no general method for carrying out the principle of 
plainness, aside from what we have considered in 
the chapter on modest attire. The members of that 
day were so thoroughly imbued with the principle 
itself that they, governed by the Spirit, voluntarily 
put it into operation. In this age, however, we are 
confronted with a well-defined system to regulate 
styles in such a way as to ignore every feature of 
Gospel plainness. To overcome this influence the 
church may, with perfect propriety, recommend, — ■ 
subject to change to suit environments, race and cli- 
matic conditions, — methods for carrying out the prin- 


ciple that the Gospel enjoins upon the followers of 
Christ. In other words, she may wisely adopt a 

This standard, however, should not be confound- 
ed with the principle, nor should it be of such a 
character as to eliminate the principle. It should be 
employed as a means to an end, and if not abused, or 
taken advantage of, should aid the church in reach- 
ing a position in the matter of plainness, fully in 
keeping with all that the New Testament demands of 
a Christian people. And in view of the united ef- 
forts of strong, worldly combinations, to make of 
the masses mere slaves to fashion, it may be con- 
sidered wise of the church to adopt, and even insist, 
within the bounds of reason, upon methods that will 
protect her members from the evil fashions of an 
unconverted world. And while the principle of plain- 
ness itself, deeply imbedded in the heart, ought, under 
the leadership of the Spirit, to be sufficient to 
keep Christian men and women nonconformed to the 
world in attire, still it is a noticeable fact that the 
plain churches of today are the ones that have adopted 
some kind of a standard as an aid in maintaining the 
principle of plainness. This fact is worthy of more 
than a passing consideration. 

What we have said of principles and methods, as 
they relate themselves to one of the church ordinances, 
and to New Testament simplicity in attire, may apply, 
in a large measure, to all of the fundamentals set forth 
in the teachings of Christ and the apostles. The prin- 
ciples are divine, and may be interpreted and ex- 
plained, but can not be altered, or abrogated. The 


methods, which, after all, are only principles in op- 
eration, may be subject to modification, and unless 
especially authorized by Divine Revelation, should 
not be classed with principles, or with fundamentals. 
Keeping this in mind, may help many church officials 
to avoid some grave errors in the application of 
church discipline. Let the motto be, " Firmness in 
principles, but charity in methods." 

Holy Men and Women in Prayer. 

The Old and New Testaments abound in references 
to praying men and praying women. Abraham, Mo- 
ses, Samuel, David, Elijah, Daniel, and all the proph- 
ets, were praying men. All the apostles were given 
to prayer. Hannah, Mary, the mother of Jesus, and 
other women, were often at the throne of grace. 
Christ, though divine, spent many precious seasons 
in prayer. In fact, one might fill pages telling about 
the praying men and women of old. 

The church of Christ should be a praying church. 
The early churches often met for seasons of prayer. 
In Acts 1 : 13, 14 we read of the saints, both men and 
women, who gathered into an upper room for a con- 
tinued season of prayer and devotion. In times of 
trouble the faithful went to God in prayer. They 
talked to him as dependent children would talk to a 
loving father. He heard their pleadings and an- 
swered their supplications. This led to trust and 

The primitive Christians assumed different attitudes 
in prayer, but the prevailing posture was kneeling. 
We read of Jesus falling on his face at prayer in the 


Garden of Gethsemane. Stephen kneeled and prayed 
(Acts 7: 60). Peter also kneeled and prayed (Acts 
9: 40). Paul kneeled down and prayed with all the 
elders of Ephesus (Acts 20: 36). At one time he 
kneeled on the seashore, with a group of parents and 
their children, and prayed with them (Acts 21: 5). 
Still the publican stood when he prayed, and he was 
justified (Luke 18: 13). Jesus at one time said: 
" When ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought 
against any" (Mark 11: 25). 

In 1 Cor. 11: 3-15 Paul gave special instructions 
regarding prayer. Here he says that while praying 
or prophesying the women should have their heads 
covered, and that the men should appear before the 
Lord uncovered. In the original, instead of covering, 
we have " veil." As it applies to sisters, Paul's lan- 
guage clearly enjoins the covering as a duty, and it 
seems that in the early churches no sister presumed 
to engage in prayer or prophesying with her head 
unveiled. The apostle appealed to the judgment of 
those whom he addressed, saying : " Is it comely that 
a woman pray unto God uncovered " (1 Cor. 11 : 13) ? 

The instructions for the brethren were just the re- 
verse. They were to pray or prophesy uncovered, 
and in this show due respect to Christ, the Head of 
man. The woman honors her head by the use of the 
prayer veil, while man honors his Head by removing 
his covering. We are not taking space to explain 
the whys and wherefores of the covering for the sis- 
ters, or to explain why there should be one rule for 
them and another for the brethren. We are simply 
calling attention to what Paul enjoined upon the sis- 


ters, regarding their privilege and duties during de- 
votional services. 

It may be well to state that the apostle's teaching 
on this point is of sufficient importance to command 
the attention, consideration and respect of those who 
would have their lives measure up to the Written 
Word. It is no less the duty of the woman to cover 
her head during prayer, than it is for man to have his 
head uncovered. The duty upon the part of one, in 
this particular, is no less obligatory than upon the 
part of the other. The authority that uncovers the 
man, covers the woman. Revoke the injunction for 
the latter, and you revoke it for the former. The 
two injunctions stand or fall together. 

War Not Christianity. 

Jesus one time made a declaration, while facing 
Pilate at the judgment hall, that ought to settle the 
question of the relation of Christianity to war. He 
said: " My kingdom is not of this world: if my king- 
dom were of this world, then would my servants 
fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but 
now is my kingdom not from hence" (John 18: 36). 
Just a few hours before, when he was arrested in 
the Garden of Gethsemane, Peter drew his sword to 
defend his Master. But Jesus said unto him: "Put 
up again thy sword into his place: for all they that 
take the sword shall perish with the sword" (Matt. 
26: 52). 

Jesus, the Head and Founder of Christianity, is 
called " the Prince of Peace." His is a kingdom of 
peace, and all his subjects are the children of peace. 



The weapons of their warfare are not carnal. In their 
work of conquest they employ the Sword of the 
Spirit, the Word of God. Their Master instructed 
Peter to return his sword to its place, thus forbidding 
him the use of a carnal weapon. Not only so, but he 
gave his disciples to understand that those who use 
the sword, should with this weapon perish together. 

His positive statement to Pilate that, if his kingdom 
were of this world, then would his servants fight for 
him, shows that he never intended that his humble 
followers should take part in carnal strife. Instead 
of killing their enemies, the subjects of his kingdom 
were instructed to love them. They were told to 
render good for evil, and to pray for those who 
would despitefully use them (Luke 6: 27, 28). The 
section of the old law, which says : " Thou shalt not 
kill," has been brought over and made a part of the 
principles governing the church of Christ. Further- 
more, this law has been so expanded as to forbid even 
the hating of others. Instead of killing those who are 
enemies, and destroying them, the saints were en- 
couraged to interest themselves in their welfare. 

The world advances and defends her interests with 
instruments of warfare. The church of Christ, not 
being of the world, but moving on a higher plane, ad- 
vances and supports the interests of the Master's 
kingdom by moral suasion. Instead of destroying the 
lives of these opposing her, she purposes to teach and 
help regenerate and save them. The mission of God's 
children in the world is to do them good, and by 
means of education, moral suasion, culture and re- 
ligion have them reach the plane of living where all 


differences may be adjusted by peaceable methods. 

The whole tenor and spirit of the New Testament 
is against war, or even the preparation for war. 
From the day of the apostles to the present hour, the 
cry of the most consecrated and the most devout fol- 
lowers of the Prince of Peace has been against war. 
On account of their nonresistant principles they have 
been imprisoned, persecuted and made to endure the 
most cruel tortures known to human devices. Thou- 
sands of them have met death at the hands of their 
heartless persecutors. Still the cry for this era of 
peace, when the swords shall be converted into plow- 
shares, and the spears into pruning hooks, has gone 
on, and will continue to go on until wars shall be abol- 

Wars, for ages, have been drenching the earth with 
blood. The best and noblest of all races have been 
literally butchered on the battle-field. Millions of 
widows have been made, and still more millions of 
orphans have been turned out into the cold world 
to suffer, because of the horrors of war. A great 
general, after viewing the clashes of contending ar- 
mies, once said : " War is hell." Considering the evils 
resulting from war, the loss of life and property, the 
devastation of the fairest lands of earth, the sorrow 
and the heartaches, the statement is none too harsh. 

War is not Christianity. It is the reverse of all 
for which the religion of the Prince of Peace stands. 
It is contrary to the whole tenor of the Sermon on 
the Mount. Besides, war is inhuman, and indicates a 
lower instead of a higher plane of existence. Chris- 
tianity should move the nations up to a higher plane, 


and when that point is once reached, the nations of 
earth are going to find peaceable methods for adjust- 
ing their differences. It is for this era of peace that 
all devout followers of the Master should contend. 
They should turn their influence against all wars, 
against the preparations for war, and demand that 
strife between nations cease. 

Oath-Bound Societies. 

Jesus, at one time, defined his policy in dealing with 
the public by saying : " In secret I have said nothing/' 
He also declared that he had spoken " openly before 
the world" (John 18: 20). Paul affirmed the same 
truth in his address before King Festus. Speaking 
of his conversion and the resurrection of Christ, he 
said: "This thing was not done in a corner" (Acts 
26: 26). 

Whatever may have been said against Christ and 
his teaching, he was never charged with establishing 
a secret order. No one in his day ever intimated that 
he was even a member of such a society. Christ 
founded the Christian church, and that is the only 
body with which he was connected. He laid down 
the principles by which this church should be gov- 
erned, but never laid down principles for a secret 
order, or any other order apart from the church. In 
the New Testament there is not the remotest hint that 
any of the early followers of Christ belonged to a 
secret order, or lodge of any character. For them 
the church was considered sufficient, and for the prin- 
ciples it represents they labored and died. 

Secret societies are incompatible with Christianity. 


Secret orders are for the few and the select, — princi- 
pally for men. Christianity is for all the world. It 
is for " whosoever will." All may accept it, if they 
so will. Secret orders are for the strong, — those ca- 
pable of taking care of themselves, and especially for 
the rich and the well-to-do. Christianity is for the 
poor and the maimed, as well as for the rich and the 

Most secret orders claim to be religious institutions, 
but they are not Christian institutions. In some of 
them the name of Christ is not used. They pose as 
religious orders, but have no salvation to offer. Not 
one of them has the new birth, and on whatever 
grounds they may offer life beyond, it must be inde- 
pendent of the new birth, and that, too, in the very 
face of the fact that Jesus said : " Except a man be 
born of water and of the Spirit he can not enter the 
kingdom of God." 

Christians of every age and clime are instructed not 
to become " unequally yoked together with unbe- 
lievers "" (2 Cor. 6: 14), and yet that is the very thing 
that every man who enters a secret, oath-bound lodge 
must do. He must fellowship with the Jew, the Mo- 
hammedan, the Buddhist, and others who do not be- 
lieve in Christ, and regard them as his brethren. Here, 
behind closed doors, the believer in Christ Jesus must 
fellowship with men with whom he would never think 
of fellowshiping in his church. He may admit that 
they are good enough for his lodge, but he will not 
admit that they are good enough for his church. 

We are not saying that a secret society has no right 
to exist. That is another question. But we do say 


that a secret, oath-bound society is no place for Chris- 
tian men. The tendency of the lodge is to rob the 
church of men, talent, money and influence. Most 
lodge men are faithful to their lodge, but only a small 
per cent of them will do as much for their church 
as they do for their lodge. They will not neglect 
their lodge dues, but they will neglect their financial 
obligations to their church. There is nothing in all 
this country that is draining the churches like the 
lodges. Men give their time, talent, money and in- 
fluence to the lodge, and let the church stand or fall 
as circumstances may determine. 

These societies are misleading thousands with false 
pretensions. At the death of a member, though he 
be the rankest unbeliever in Christianity in the com- 
munity, they speak of his admission into the " Grand 
Lodge above," thus giving the public to understand 
that they have life eternal to offer independent of 
Christ. Not only so, but, according to the claims of 
such orders, the scheme of redemption, as set forth 
in the teachings of Christ, cuts no necessary figure 
in salvation. Young men, who are led to believe this, 
unite with the lodge, and stake their chance of sal- 
vation on what the lodge may have to offer. In this 
way they are led away from the church. This places 
the lodge in competition with the church, claiming 
for itself everything that the church may have to of- 
fer in the way of future life and happiness. 

Must Not Swear. 

Under the Old Law, the Mosaic Dispensation, it 
was decreed : " Thou shalt not take the name of the 


Lord thy God in vain " (Ex. 20: 7). Or, in other 
words, " Thou shalt not indulge in profanity." Jesus 
expands this law, and makes it to include more than 
was ever dreamed of even by the devout prophets. 
Hear him : " Again, ye have heard that it hath been 
said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear 
thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths : 
But I say unto you, Swear not at all ; neither by heav- 
en ; for it is God's throne : nor by the earth ; for it is 
his footstool : neither by Jerusalem ; for it is the city 
of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy 
head, because thou canst not make one hair white or 
black. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; 
Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh 
of evil" (Matt. 5: 33-37). 

Here the whole story is told, even to the elimination 
of the civil oath. Instead of swearing or taking the 
oath, when called on to bear testimony before civil 
authorities, the Christian's answer is to be " Yea " or 
" Nay." He testifies to the truth of his statement in 
the simplest possible way. He is to be a person 
of truth, and in this particular is to make a standing 
record for himself. His word should be taken for 
the truth, so far as he is able to testify, without being 
backed up by any kind of an oath. 

At this point James (5: 12) comes forward with a 
divinely-authorized statement that need not be mis- 
understood. We will hear him : " But above all 
things, my brethren, swear not, neither by the earth, 
neither by any other oath : but let your yea be yea ; 
and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation." 
This includes everything in the form of an oath, — 


even the oaths of secret societies. Above all things, 
believers in Christ must not swear. The statement 
makes a clean sweep of every excuse that might be 
offered for the civil or any other kind of an oath. 
The Jewish law forbade profanity, but allowed the 
civil oath, while the teachings of Christ forbid both. 
It simply means a higher plane of living, and a high- 
er order of service. 

The civil government, recognizing the justice of the 
Christian's claim, in this particular, has provided that 
those who are conscientiously opposed to taking an 
oath may affirm to their statement. And since this 
answers every purpose of the law, and comes within 
the limits of what Jesus and James have said, regard- 
ing swearing, the Christian is at liberty, in all of our 
courts of justice, and before any civil officer, to obey 
this part of the Gospel. 

Going to Law. 

In his letter to Timothy, Paul says: "We know 
that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully" (1 
Tim. 1:8). In a broad sense, this may apply to civil 
law, as well as to the law of Moses, but it is the mis- 
use of the law, in the courts of litigation, that we 
wish to consider at this time. 

It is, however, in 1 Cor. 6: 1-7, that we have specif- 
ic instructions regarding those of the same faith go- 
ing to law one with another, " Dare any of you, hav- 
ing a matter against another, go to law before the un- 
just, and not before the saints ?" Then he adds: 
" Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, 


because ye go to law one with another." Then notice 
his sharp rebuke : " Nay, ye do wrong." 

And so it is. Brethren who go to law with one 
another do wrong. They sin because they violate the 
very plain teaching of the Gospel. Paul reasons this 
way : " Is it so, that there is not a wise man among 
you? No, not one that shall be able to judge be- 
tween his brethren ? " The apostle would have the 
members settle their differences among themselves, 
and under no circumstances would he permit them to 
appear against each other in the courts. 

But this matter, in the way of instructions, may 
go even further than members of the same body ap- 
pealing to the civil courts. Within the limits of 
reason, it should have a restraining influence with 
those who would enter suits against their neighbors, 
and those who are not members of the church. Few 
things in neighborhoods and in large communities 
have given rise to more ill feelings and persistent 
hatred than bitter lawsuits between neighbors. Many 
of these suits have been over trifles, and in the years 
of litigation fortunes have been consumed. The 
Brethren, as a people, believe that the spirit of the 
Gospel is decidedly opposed to the followers of Christ 
taking to the courts, complaints against nonmembers, 
that may possibly be settled in a better way. They 
believe that members of the body of Christ should 
not be hasty about attempting to secure justice at the 
civil tribunals. Paul would say to them : " Why do 
ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded" (1 
Cor. 6: 7)? Members will therefore do well to 
counsel their own brethren before entering suit against 


even nonmembers. By counseling others, ways may 
be found to avoid litigation, and thus protect the rep- 
utation of the church, as well as the parties them- 

The Anointing Service. 

In James 5: 14, 15 we have these instructions re- 
garding the anointing service : " Is any sick among 
you? let him call for the elders of the church; and 
let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the 
name of the Lord : And the prayer of faith shall save 
the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he 
have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him." 

It will be noticed that this service is to be per- 
formed by the elders of the church, and that it is 
intended for members only. James says : " Is any 
sick among you ? " This limits the anointing to those 
who belong to the church. The sick, desiring the 
anointing, are to call for the elders. In the apostolic 
times there was supposed to be a plurality of elders 
in each congregation, hence it would not be difficult 
to secure elders when needed for the service. 

The purpose of the anointing is twofold: First, the 
restoration to health, and as a second consideration 
it is promised that if the sick person " have committed 
sins, they shall be forgiven him." We read that " the 
prayer of faith shall save the sick," — that he is to be 
raised up from his sickness. When called to the bed- 
side of the sick, devout elders pray over them, and 
anoint them with oil in the name of the Lord. This 
they do, feeling that the God, who knows all things, 
will do for the sick that which is for their good. They 


pray for healing, anoint for healing, and yet, with 
implicit confidence, trust the Lord to fulfill his 
promise in his own good way. 

There is another promise, and that is an important 
one. If the sick have committed sins, they shall be 
forgiven. This does not mean forgiveness where 
there has been a life of sin, or where there has been 
willful or premeditated sinning. It means the sins 
growing out of the human weakness of saints whose 
faces are set Zionward. The supposition is that those 
who call for the anointing have done what they could 
to make wrong right, and that they have been striv- 
ing to live right in the sight of God. And yet it is 
said of such, "If they have committed sins." A 
strong emphasis should be placed on the if, for it is 
not presumed that men and women can go on sinning 
for years, and then, near the end of life, have all 
their sins removed, because of the anointing service. 

The Temperate Life. 

The faithful followers of Jesus must, of necessity, 
be a temperate people. They could not be otherwise 
and yet remain true to the higher ideals of Christiani- 
ty. Writing to those who strive for the mastery, 
Paul says they are " temperate in all things " ( 1 Cor. 
9: 25). By way of illustration, this applies to the 
spiritual life. The man who would reach the full 
stature in Christ Jesus must live the temperate life. 
As Peter says : Add " to knowledge temperance " 
(2 Peter 1:6). He places temperance among the 
Christian graces, and it must be regarded as a very 
important part of these graces. 


Temperance is sometimes said to be the proper and 
moderate use of things. A better definition is " the 
right use of lawful things." No one has a right to 
make even a moderate use of that which is harmful. 
Every man is limited to the use of things that are 
right, and even there he must be temperate in the use 
of the things that are right within themselves. This 
applies to what we eat, to the clothing we wear, the 
habits we contract, as well as to what we drink. 
One can be temperate in eating, as well as in drink- 
ing, and yet there are things that one may not eat, 
as well as there are things that he should not drink. 
In alcoholic liquors there is nothing that is beneficial 
to the human system, even when employed in limited 
quantities. The world-wide tendency in the use of 
intoxicants is drunkenness. This is the natural tend- 
ency. Drunkenness naturally leads to crime and 
every other thing that is debasing. Strong drink and 
impurity go together. The former paves the way for 
the latter. 

Drunkenness is everywhere condemned in the 
Scriptures. It is declared that heaven itself is barred 
against the drunkard (1 Cor. 6: 10). Drunkenness 
is classed with envyings, murder, adultery and for- 
nication (Gal. 5: 19-21). It is regarded as the worst 
and the most debasing of crimes against God and 
society. We need not occupy space with many quo- 
tations. A few will suffice. In Prov. 20: 1 we read: 
" Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging/' " Woe 
unto him that giveth his neighbor drink, that puttest 
thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken also " 
(Hab. 2: IS). This settles the saloon business, for 


no man can run a saloon without passing strong 
drink to his neighbor, and making men drunk. In 
fact, the saloon may be regarded as the father of the 

We have reached an age when the only safe and 
sane thing to do with intoxicants is to touch, taste 
and handle not. Not only so, but we must help to 
make the conditions such that our neighbors will not 
be led into temptation, and thereby into ruin. This 
may be brought about by every Christian man, — 
and woman too, if permitted, — working and voting 
for prohibition, either local, county, State or national. 
While we are not urging members of the body of 
Christ to take an active part in politics, we do urge 
them to give the cause of temperance their full and 
united strength. This they can do without sacrificing 
any principle. It would rather be a sacrificing of 
principle, — when one has an opportunity to help de- 
stroy a great evil, — deliberately to refuse doing his 
full part. 

Intemperance may be regarded as the greatest 
crime breeder in this or any other land. It is ruin- 
ing more men, destroying more homes, and causing 
more wrongdoing than any one thing that can be 
named. Liquor causes more deaths, and leads to 
more crimes than can be charged up to any one thing 
in the world. We need not give figures showing the 
number of deaths, the number of homes destroyed, 
the number of destitute mothers and children turned 
out into a cold world, the number sent to the peni- 
tentiary, the number sent to the gallows, the number 
sent to the poorhouses, the number placed in the 


asylums, and the number of murders committed, all 
because of liquor. We need not tell of the wrecked 
lives, the unhappy homes, the sad hearts or the mil- 
lions of dollars worse than wasted. All this is known. 
We need mainly to emphasize the importance of 
the temperate life, in every line of our experience. 
Fortunate is the man who never touches liquor, even 
for medicinal purposes. True, Paul, at one time, 
told Timothy to drink a little wine (only a little) for 
his stomach's sake, meaning that he should use wine 
simply as a medicine. Were Paul living now, and 
noting what horrors follow in the wake of modern 
drinks, and observing how little value is credited to 
alcohol by the medical profession, he would not rec- 
ommend to the young and promising minister the 
kind of wine made these days. 

The Clean Life. 

David prayed that the Lord would create in him 
a clean heart (Psa. 51: 10). Paul instructed his 
spiritual son, Timothy, to keep himself pure (1 Tim. 
5: 22). In his Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said: 
" Blessed are the pure in heart " (Matt. 5:8). That 
was a fine prayer of the Psalmist : " Cleanse thou me 
from secret faults" (Psa. 19: 12). There is another 
injunction in 2 Tim. 2 : 22, just as helpful : " Flee also 
youthful lusts." 

These thoughts lead up to the clean life, the life 
that every Christian should live before God and man. 
Let it always be borne in mind that God searches 
the heart, and that, in determining character, he looks 
upon the heart. He judges us by what we really are, 


and not by what we pretend to be. Every man, so 
to speak, lives two lives, — one outward, and the other 
inward. We may judge of the standing by what we 
see and happen to know. God judges by what really 
exists in the heart, in the mind, in the soul, in the 
thoughts, in the meditations and in the desires. 
Knowing this, well might David pray : " Cleanse thou 
me from secret faults." 

There is perhaps no phase of life more important 
than that relating to the purity of thoughts, medita- 
tions and desires. The man who lives a clean life 
in his thoughts, who keeps his imagination within the 
limits of purity, and who confines his desires to the 
things that are right and clean and proper, is the one 
who can lay claim to the clean life. But here, right 
in the heart, is where the foundation for the real 
life is laid. Well has it been said of man: "As he 
thinketh in his heart, so is he" (Prov. 23: 7). The 
thoughts, the meditations and the desires make the 
man, and determine his character. 

In view of the fact that all things are open before 
God, and that, in determining what one is, he looketh 
upon the heart, it must be evident to every thinking 
person that the clean life is the only life that the 
Christian can afford to live. Any other life is sheer 
mockery, and can be accounted for on no other ground 
than that one has no respect for himself or for his 

There are secret sins of lust, that fasten them- 
selves onto people when young, and often follow 
them all through life. These are the sins that con- 
taminate the soul and weaken both mind and body. 


Any thought, or any impure or unclean habit should 
be shunned as one would avoid the fangs of the most 
dangerous reptile. This can be done only by think- 
ing, meditating and acting along right lines. As 
Paul would have us do, — let the mind feast on the 
things that are honest, just, pure and lovely (Philpp. 
4: 8), 

Our Habits. 

We are creatures of habits, and since habits will 
and must be a part of the life, it is of the highest im- 
portance that only the best of habits be formed. 
It is certainly not demanding too much when we in- 
sist on each person regulating his own habits. This 
he can and will do, if he is thoughtful and resolute. 

One may be industrious, or he may be indolent. 
He may be saving, or he may make of himself a 
spendthrift. It is in his power to become a miser, 
or to be noted for his deeds of charity. It is a matter 
of his own choosing, to be selfish or generous; to be 
cleanly in his appearance, or to be neglectful of self ; 
to be prompt, or uncertain about his engagements, or 
even to be coarse or refined in his general deportment. 
We need not arrange a list of habits, good and bad. 
We can merely call attention to the importance of 
habit-forming, so as to put the reader to thinking. 

But there is one baneful habit to which special at- 
tention should be called, and that is the tobacco habit, 
— probably the most widespread habit in the civilized 
world. Men everywhere chew or smoke. And what 
is remarkable, the habit was unknown before the dis- 
covery of America, and owes its origin to the North 


American Indians. At the start, the use of tobacco 
was resented by civilized Europe, but now it is popu- 
lar in the highest, as well as in the lowest, ranks of 

But the habit is an evil one. It is unclean, un- 
healthy and expensive. Not only so, but it is repulsive 
to some of the most devout and refined people of all 
lands. We say it is an evil, because its results are 
evil. It has been shown, time and again, that the use 
of tobacco, both in smoking and in chewing, affects 
the brain and undermines the health. It is a well- 
settled fact that the tobacco-using students in col- 
leges and universities can not make as good grades as 
the students that have never formed the habit. Dis- 
cussing the cigarette habit, — which is found to be 
as harmful for young men as for boys, — Mr. C. W. 
Baines, in the Sunday School Times, says that the 
record of Harvard University shows that, for the last 
fifty years, not one tobacco-using student has stood 
at the head of his class, though eighty-three out of 
every one hundred of the students use the weed. 
Then it is added that, as a rule, the nonsmoking boys 
and young men can enter college one year sooner 
than the tobacco-users. This speaks volumes against 
the brain-destroying habit. Surgeons have learned 
that in case of an operation, the non-tobacco-using 
patients recover sooner than those who have formed 
the tobacco habit. 

It has also been demonstrated that tobacco is a 
poison, and that, when first used, it has a terrible ef- 
fect on the human system, thus showing that it was 
never intended for men in any form. Then it is 


offensive, so much so, that in most public places, such 
as waiting rooms, there is a notice posted : " No 
Smoking Allowed." On all passenger trains there is 
a special coach for smokers. They dare not indulge 
in their habit while occupying first-class coaches. 
This alone ought to serve as a sufficient hint for peo- 
ple who wish to form only the best habits. 

The use of tobacco is unclean, and at times be- 
comes exceedingly repulsive. The smoke poisons the 
atmosphere that people must breathe, while the fumes 
from chewing sometimes produce a stench that is de- 
cidedly offensive to the more cultured. Can one say 
that a habit against which so much can be said is 
becoming a Christian? Most assuredly not! So ob- 
jectionable is the habit that many of the denomina- 
tions will not permit their ministers to indulge in its 
use in any form. Think of the expense connected 
with the worse than useless practice. It leads to the 
life-long habit of spending money for that which will 
undermine health and weaken the brain. Candidly, 
why should one employ his own hard earnings for his 
own personal injury? 

Worldly Amusements. 

There are those, and Paul makes mention of them 
in 2 Tim. 3 : 4, who are " lovers of pleasure more 
than lovers of God." James (5: 5) refers to the 
same class, when he says : " Ye have lived in pleasure 
on the earth." With such people, pleasure-seeking 
is the highest ideal of life. Some of them, with their 
names on the church roll, may go so far as to turn 
the house of prayer into a house of mirth. It does 


little good to preach the truth to them; for, as Jesus 
says, the good is " choked with cares and riches and 
pleasures of this life" (Luke 8: 14). For thou- 
sands, who do not have riches, there are the " pleas- 
ures of this life " to crowd out the Word. 

This is a pleasure-loving age, and millions are more 
concerned about the life of pleasure than they are 
about the life beyond. They are more interested in 
the gayety of this world, than in the joys and hap- 
piness in store for the blessed and redeemed. They 
think more about the theater than they think about 
the house of God. Not a few are more interested 
in the card table than the Lord's table, and are more 
gifted in shuffling cards than in turning the leaves of 
the Sacred Volume. They may neglect the religious 
assembly of the saints on the Lord's Day, but they 
do not neglect the Sunday baseball, the Sunday golf 
grounds, or the Sunday evening picture show. They 
may have no money for missions, or church expenses, 
but they have plenty for places of amusements and 
for the pleasures of this life in general. They may 
not be able to converse intelligently on religious topics, 
but they can talk by the hour about this, that and the 
other flesh-gratifying entertainment they have en- 

We have a land of churches, and thousands are in- 
terested in the teachings of the Master, but it is lam- 
entable to think that other thousands, in still greater 
numbers, are more interested in the pleasure resorts 
of the land than they are concerned about the holy 
sanctuaries. And the fact that the thousands, whose 
names are on the church rolls, are also interested in 


the various pleasures of this life, makes the situation 
still more lamentable. 

Well may it be said of this generation, as it was 
said of a generation in the ages gone by : " The heart 
of the wise is in the house of mourning; but the 
heart of fools is in the house of mirth" (Eccles. 7: 
4). What else are the theater, the dance-hall, the 
billiard-hall, the card-room, and many of the places 
of entertainments, but houses of mirth? With these 
Peter would class places of " revellings, banquet- 
ings," and the like (1 Peter 4:3). 

The Christian who resolves to live a life of faith- 
fulness must separate himself from everything that 
would prove detrimental to the profession that he has 
made. This does not mean that he should cut out the 
gatherings not strictly religious, or even entertain- 
ments, that may prove helpful to him in his intel- 
lectual, business and social life. Probably there is no 
better rule than the oft-stated saying: Avoid the 
places where you would be ashamed to have Jesus 
find you. 

Evil Speaking. 

The Christian's life consists in bridling his tongue 
as well as in controlling his thoughts and regulat- 
ing his passions. In James 1 : 26 we read : " If any 
man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth 
not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this 
man's religion is vain." It will thus be observed 
that the use one makes of the tongue, determines 
the value of his religion. An unbridled tongue 
means a vain religion. Notice Prov. 13: 3 on this 


point : " He that keepeth his mouth keepeth his 
life." Then, further: "A wholesome tongue is a 
tree of life " (Prov. 15: 4), and also, "A soft answer 
turneth away wrath" (Prov. 15: 1). 

It is the converted tongue that honors the Lord, 
and yet we are told that " the tongue can no man 
tame." And while this is true, we are told to 
" keep thy tongue from evil, and thy lips from 
speaking guile" (Psa. 34: 13). As members of the 
body of Christ, we are instructed to " speak not 
evil one of another" (James 4: 11). Peter would 
have us lay " aside all malice . . . and all evil 
speakings" (1 Peter 2:1). The improper use of the 
tongue is severely condemned in both the Old and 
the New Testaments, and evil speaking is classed 
with the worst of sins. 

The people of God are not only to refrain from 
speaking evil of one another, but they are admon- 
ished not to speak evil of any one. This does not 
mean that sin and wrongdoing are to be over- 
looked, but it does mean that one is not to spend his 
time talking about the things that are evil. In order 
to counteract evil, there are times when the wrong- 
doings of people must be mentioned. This can be 
done without falling into the habit of talking about 
evil things, or speaking of evil reports. 

Evil speaking not only affects the reputation of 
those about whom we speak, but it contaminates 
the soul of those who do the talking. No one can 
indulge in evil talking, or talking about the mis- 
takes and sins of others, without seriously affecting 
his own soul. The habit is a most dangerous sin, 


and is doing more to poison the minds of other- 
wise good people than any other one thing that 
could be named. The practice of evil talking, or 
talking about things that are evil is, to the mind 
and soul, what unhealthy and unsanitary food is to 
the body. Men and women, who would have clean, 
healthy and pure minds, must learn to think and 
talk about the things that are helpful, and avoid, 
as much as possible, conversation about that which 
is poisonous to the mind and soul. 

Honesty in Business. 

It showed a fine quality in the apostle to the 
Gentiles to be able to say, as he did say near the 
end of his earnest and successful ministry : " We 
have wronged no man, we have corrupted no man, 
we have defrauded no man " (2 Cor. 7: 2). In the 
next chapter he gives advice to those who would 
live the upright life in the business world : " Pro- 
viding for honest things, not only in the sight of 
the Lord, but also in the sight of men" (2 Cor. 8: 


In these days, when there is a persistent grasp- 
ing for money, and an insatiable desire for wealth, 
it is important that those who would deal honestly 
in the sight of God, as well as in the sight of men, 
be constantly on their guard. The world is full of 
dishonorable schemes and financial tricks, and on 
every hand those skilled in business are taking ad- 
vantage of their fellow-man. The rich are growing 
richer, while the poor are finding it hard to make 
even a fair living. The disposition to accumulate 


property, with a view of living in luxury, is induc- 
ing men to employ all kinds of schemes, in order to 
gain their ends, and in the rush for wealth, old- 
time principles of downright honesty are forgotten. 
While every man should endeavor to make a good 
living for himself and for his family, and should 
provide a good home for those entrusted to his 
care, and see to it that temporal provisions are 
made for the later years of life, still only methods 
that are considered honest should be employed in 
either making a living, or in accumulating property. 
Fortunate is the man, whether he accumulate much 
or little, who, at the close of his business career, 
can say, as Paul said : " We have wronged no 
man, we have corrupted no man, we have defrauded 

no man." 

The Golden Rule. 

No better rule for the family, for the church or 
the world, was ever laid down than the one given 
by the great Teacher of all teachers: "All things 
whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, 
do ye even so to them" (Matt. 7: 12). The rule 
has well earned the title, which stands at the head 
of this chapter, and were it to become general in 
the life and practice of men and women, in every 
grade of society, this world would come marvel- 
ously near being a veritable paradise. It is not a 
matter of treating others as they treat you. That 
is earthly. But treat them as you would that they 
treat you, under like circumstances. This is heav- 
enly. It means honesty all around, and also means 


a fair chance for everybody, and a square deal for 
each person, whether rich or poor, great or small. 
The rule would settle all disputes between neigh- 
bor and neighbor, as well as between labor and 
capital. It would actually settle all strife between 
nations, and would settle the contest on every 
battle-field, without the loss of a man. Possibly 
we are not making enough of the Golden Rule. 
Not enough people are making it their standard 
in life. Not enough sermons are preached about 
the heaven-born rule, nor is it taught in the schools 
as it might be. The world over, there are plenty 
of rules for every line of business, and every de- 
partment of life, but none of them measure up to 
the Golden Rule. 


Holiness and purity go together. Without the 
one the other will not exist. " Holiness unto the 
Lord," is one of the cardinal doctrines of the New 
Testament. We are told to " follow peace with all 
men, and holiness, without which no man shall see 
the Lord " (Heb. 12: 14). This being true, there is 
no salvation in heaven for the man or the woman 
who does not follow after holiness. But, notice 
how the Lord speaks to his people, personally: " Be 
ye holy; for I am holy" (1 Peter 1: 16). The rea- 
son for holiness is that God is holy, and only the 
holy can see God. Hence, in 1 Thess. 5: 27, we 
read about " all the holy brethren." Holy people 
engage in " holy conversation and godliness " (2 
Peter 3: 11). 


Holiness unto the Lord leads up to the higher 
attainments in Christ Jesus. It means the ideal 
spiritual life, — the life that strives to rise above all 
that is unholy, impure and unclean. It is the en- 
nobling and purifying quality in the Christian's 
make-up that places him in close, personal com- 
munion with the great Divine. This plane of living, 
however, is reached by the way of faith and obedi- 
ence. Only those who have implicit faith in Jesus 
Christ, and keep his sayings, can claim the holiness 
so highly emphasized in the New Testament. Those 
who set aside the plain commandments, enjoined in 
the teachings of the Master and his disciples, have 
no Gospel claim whatever to holiness. The doc- 
trine presupposes faithfulness in all things, and on- 
ly those who are loyal to the Gospel can justly lay 
claim to holiness in the Lord. Men and women, 
who set up the claim of personal holiness without 
any regard whatever to the plain teachings of the 
New Testament, not only deceive themselves, but 
they may deceive others. Holiness and obedience 
go hand in hand. 

Marriage and Divorce. 

Marriage is the first and oldest institution in the 
world, and dates from the Garden of Eden. God, 
seeing that it was not good for man to be alone, 
made for him a woman and thus sanctified and set 
his approval on the marriage relation. No institu- 
tion can be more holy, and none should be more 
highly respected. 

In the beginning God intended that there should 


be one woman for each man, and that a union be- 
tween the two should be for life. The idea of di- 
vorce, or separation, never entered into the pri- 
mary arrangement. Divorce became an after-con- 
sideration, and was brought about by sin, or the 
hardening of the hearts of the people. While di- 
vorces were permitted under the Mosaic Law, the 
privilege, save for one cause, has been denied by 
the Gospel. In Matt. 19: 8, 9 we read: "Moses 
because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you 
to put away your wives: but from the beginning 
it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever 
shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, 
and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and 
whoso marrieth her which is put away doth com- 
mit adultery." This permits divorce, with privilege 
of remarriage, for the cause of fornication only, 
and even in providing for this permission, the 
church of God must be certain that this cause is 
clearly in evidence before she can even tolerate 
among her members a remarriage upon the part of 
the innocent party. In these days of extreme loose- 
ness in the divorce courts, and the lack of respect 
for the matrimonial vow, the greatest possible ef- 
forts should be made to maintain the sacredness 
and purity of the marriage relation. No church 
that has any regard whatever for the standing of 
her members, or her influence for good in the world, 
can afford to tolerate any looseness along this line. 
Without a standard here that is wholly above re- 
proach, there is no possibility of maintaining a 
high spiritual standing in the community. 


Considering marriage further, we can not too 
thoroughly emphasize the importance of the parties 
to the marriage contract being suited to each other 
in race, temperament, sentiment, training and re- 
ligion. A union for life ought to be entered into 
with the utmost care, and with as little haste as 
practicable. Nor should the religious convictions 
of the parties be overlooked. Many of the best 
thinkers have reached the conclusion that a Chris- 
tian should not marry outside of the faith. And, in 
fact, Paul would seem to sustain this conclusion in 
what he says in 1 Cor. 7 : 39, about marrying " only 
in the Lord." In 2 Cor. 6 : 14 we have this bearing 
on the same subject: " Be ye not unequally yoked 
together with unbelievers." There is no closer 
relation than that existing between husband and 
wife, and in view of this relationship, in which 
both are considered one flesh, the importance of a 
oneness in Christ Jesus can not be too often and too 
forcibly emphasized. Only when two are agreed 
in the one faith, can they walk together in perfect 
harmony, and bring up their children in the nurture 
and admonition of the Lord. 

Christian Giving. 

The true worshipers of God, in all ages, have 
been noted for their liberality. Even before the 
giving of the law, we find Abraham making an of- 
fering of the " tenth part of all " to Melchisedec, 
priest of the most high God (Heb. 7: 1, 2). The 
generous giving for the erection of the temple, for the 
support of the elaborate system of worship, for 


sacrifices, for offerings, and for other purposes, 
shows a spirit of liberality. 

Then, all through the Old Testament we find 
traces of this spirit, and especially do we find it in 
the teaching of the faithful prophets. In this, none 
of them, however, surpasses what is recorded in 
Mai. 3 : 10, where we read : " Bring ye all the tithes 
into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine 
house, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord 
of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heav- 
en, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not 
be room enough to receive it." God has never per- 
mitted the liberality of his faithful people to go 
unnoticed. Even the offering of the poor widow, 
who was able to give only a very small amount, — 
two mites, — received much more than a passing 
consideration. What she did has been made a mat- 
ter of special record for the encouragement of all 
future generations (Mark 12: 42-44). 

While the law of tithing may not have been car- 
ried over, and made the rule of giving for the new 
dispensation, still a far better rule has been recom- 
mended, and even emphasized. This rule will be 
found in 1 Cor. 16: 2: "Upon the first day of the 
week let every one of you lay by him in store as 
God hath prospered him." The man who lays by 
as " God hath prospered him " will always be found 
a liberal giver. Paul makes this further reference 
to giving : " Every man according as he purposeth 
in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of 
necessity : for God loveth a cheerful giver " (2 Cor. 
9.7). It will be observed that giving is urged as 
a heart work. One must purpose in his heart what 


he is going to give, then he should give cheerfully, 
or as the apostle says : " If there be first a willing 
mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, 
and not according to that he hath not " (2 Cor. 8 : 


Every Christian should be a liberal and a cheer- 
ful giver. He should train himself that way. His 
heart should be in this as weW as in any other serv- 
ice. He should think the matter over, and then 
purpose in his heart just what he is going to do. 
He is in this world to do good, and he can help 
with his money as well as in other ways. There are 
the poor to feed, the naked to clothe, the Sunday- 
school work to support, the church expenses to 
meet, houses of worship to build, institutions of 
charity and education to be established, and the 
Gospel to be preached both in this and other lands. 
All of these afford the Christian an excellent oppor- 
tunity to do good as he goes through (the world, 
and in order that he may have something with 
which to aid, in many good lines of work, it is im- 
portant that he early in life adopt some systematic 
rule for setting apart a reasonable part of his earn- 
ings. He can set apart one-tenth, or even more. 
At any rate, the giving should be regulated by the 
way the Lord is prospering him. 

Giving, and especially systematic giving, is good 
for the soul. It makes one feel that he is living for 
some higher purpose than merely self-interest. As 
a good old Quaker one time said : " We go through 
this world but the one time, and while so doing we 
should do all the good we can." This should be 
the feeling of every Christian man and woman. 


All should resolve to be of some value to suffer- 
ing humanity. Liberal and systematic giving is 
the very best antidote against covetousness, — one 
of the very worst sins in the world. In fact, it is 
classed with drunkenness and fornication, and is 
also a form of idolatry. Those who, in good faith, 
and cheerfully set apart a reasonable share of their 
earnings or income, for deserving causes, will find 
giving one of the greatest blessings of life. It will 
shield them from the awful temptation of avarice 
and covetousness, and enable them most fully to 
realize that " it is more blessed to give than to re- 
ceive" (Acts 20: 35). 

A Life of Service. 

During the Civil War in the United States most 
of the soldiers enlisted for three years, or during 
the war. It is not this way in the great Christian 
army. Men and women are required to enlist for 
life, and then it is demanded of them that they are 
" faithful unto death," for it is to such that the 
"crown of life" will be given (Rev. 2: 10). 

A lifelong service means a lifelong faithfulness, 
lifelong obedience, as well as a lifelong witness 
for the Master and his kingdom. It is not sufficient 
to be converted. It is not enough merely to put on 
Christ in the sacred rite of baptism, nor is it suffi- 
cient to observe the church ordinances from year to 
year. All of this is right and proper, but a life of 
service means more than being born into the family 
of God, and observing the church sacraments. God's 
children are supposed to be a working body, com- 


posed of those who are in the church for a purpose, 
and that purpose to make themselves useful. If 
practicable, they should leave the world at least a 
little better than they find it. And especially should 
they strive to leave the church in a better condition 
than it was when they entered the body. 

As viewed from the religious standpoint, the 
Christian's life should be a busy one. He is to serve 
his Maker diligently all the days of his life. His 
influence and the influence of all he controls should 
be on the side of the religion he professes. Wheth- 
er he engages in manual labor or in business enter- 
prises, or devotes his time to professional duties, 
everything undertaken and done should be with 
a view of advancing the interests of the kingdom. 
And his manner of life ought to be such as to im- 
press all those around him with the fact that he 
is serving his God with a whole heart, as well as 
with all his substance. 

Men and women are not converted merely to be 
saved. This is a part of the purpose, of course, but 
as new-born creatures they are to make themselves 
useful in some manner. If they can do nothing 
more, they can let their light shine. Then they can 
see to it that their influence, whether it be much or 
little, is on the right side of questions. In the 
great Christian army of God, in contending for 
righteousness and holiness, they can march with the 
army, work with the army, and die while in full 
service and on duty. 


Death Not the End. 

Job, the sage of Uz, one time asked : " If a man 
die, shall he live again " (Job 14 : 14) ? Though he 
lived before the day of written revelation, he be- 
lieved in God, and his soul cried out after him. He 
even looked beyond the grave, and endeavored to 
find an answer to his inquiry. The answer came 
a little later, for in chapter 19: 26 (American Re- 
vised Version) we read: "And after my skin, even 
this body, is destroyed, then without my flesh shall 
I see God." He then knew, as a matter of certainty, 
that he would live after death, and that death is not 
the end. The conviction of Job, regarding man's 
future condition, was the conviction of all the holy 
men and women of Bible times. 

Even some of the heathen philosophers, and oth- 
ers of religious conceptions, died believing in a 
hereafter. While their idea of the one God may 
have been tainted with error, still, deep down in 
their souls, was the feeling that death would not be 
the end of their existence. Their souls' yearnings 
indicated to them that there is a hereafter. In fact, 
the thought of a future state for man became a 
conviction. The conviction became a part of the 
thinking man, and in the absence of the revelation, 
with which the Hebrew race was favored, they 
reached a settled conviction regarding their fu- 
ture. It was a conviction that was as well defined 
in their minds, and was as much a part of them as 
is the instinct of the bird for a warmer clime. The 
God who made the bird made the instinct, and he 


also made the clime. Without the genial clime he 
never would have given the bird the instinct. And 
so it was with man even before the dawn of revela- 
tion. The God who made the man put into his 
soul the conviction of the hereafter, and it is just as 
natural for man to think of the life beyond as it is 
for the young bird, that has never been south, to 
feel that there is a far-away, genial clime. 

But Paul, in the full light of revelation, did not 
need to depend wholly on the feeling that the Crea- 
tor has planted in every man's soul. With him the 
future state of man was a matter of knowledge. No- 
tice his careful statement, found in 2 Cor. 5 : 1 : 
" For we know that if our earthly house of this tab- 
ernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, 
an house not made with hands, eternal in the heav- 
ens." With him it was not a vague conception, as 
he said, " We know." And what is true of the 
apostle, in this particular, may be true with all the 
believers in Christ Jesus. The conviction of a fu- 
ture existence was well fixed in the minds of all the 
apostles, for Jesus one time said to them : " In my 
Father's house are many mansions: if it were not 
so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place 
for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I 
will come again, and receive you unto myself; that 
where I am, there ye may be also " (John 14: 2, 3). 
Taking it the world over, including every race of 
people, civilized and uncivilized, there is probably 
no one thing more thoroughly settled than the 
reality of the future state, with the Christian having 
the real and proper conception. 




r o- 




And The State of the Dead. 

™ a " The condition of man between death and the res- 

o ha urrection has always been a matter of interest. We 

! ^ as see our loved ones close their eyes in death. We 

]t 1S realize that the spirit has left the body, has entered 

]f t0 into another state of existence, but what is its con- 

dition? Is the spirit, or soul, — and we shall make 
no distinction between soul and spirit in this chap- 
ter, — in a conscious or in an unconscious state? 
When the spirit of a dear friend leaves the body, is 
that spirit conscious of passing events? Can the 
spirit, in this state, think and observe what is going 
on? Let us see what the Scriptures have to say 
'» on the subject. 

; In the Sacred Record death is frequently called a 

sleep. It is said that Stephen fell asleep. While 
Lazarus was dead, Jesus said he was asleep. After 
the death of the body, the inspired writers did not 
consider the spirit dead. They regarded the con- 
dition of the dead as a sleep, — a very pleasant 
thought. Solomon makes a clear distinction be- 
tween the body and the spirit at death, for he says : 
" Then shall the dust return to he earth as it was, 
and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it " 
(Eccles. 12: 7). The spirit of man, while in the care 
and presence of God, would certainly be alive. 
When John, the Revelator, was permitted to look 
into heaven, he " saw under the altar the souls of 
them that were slain" (Rev. 6: 9). These souls 
were alive, and conscious, for in the very next verse 


it is said that they could talk. This, of itself, ought 
to settle the question. 

We, however, call attention to the story of Laz- 
arus and Dives, as told in Luke 16: 19-31. Here we 
are told that Lazarus and the rich man died, the 
former being taken to Abraham's bosom, while the 
latter lifted up his eyes in Hades. Not only so, 
but we find both of them conscious, and capable of 
thinking and acting. No clearer evidence of a 
conscious state, after death, could be placed in hu- 
man language. 

To this we add the observation made on the 
Mount of Transfiguration. In this instance, and 
in the presence of Peter, James and John, Moses 
and Elijah, in their glorified state, appeared and 
conversed with Christ. Moses had been dead more 
than 1,400 years, while Elijah was translated over 
900 years before. The mere fact that these men, 
after an absence of hundreds of years, could return 
to the scenes of earth, and converse so as to be 
heard and understood, should be regarded as evi- 
dence of the most satisfactory type, in support of 
the conscious state of men and women between 
death and the resurrection. 

The Second Coming of Christ. 

One could hardly conceive of a more impressive 
object lesson than that given the apostles on the 
Mount of Olives, at the ascension of Jesus. We are 
told in Luke 24: 50-53, and Acts 1 : 9-12, that he led 
his trusted few out as far as Bethany, on the eastern 
slope of the mount, and there, in broad daylight, 


was seen to ascend into heaven, a cloud receiving 
him out of their sight. Two celestial beings stand- 
ing by said : " Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye 
gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is 
taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like 
manner as ye have seen him go into heaven." 

One could wish no finer evidence in support of 
the doctrine of the return of the Master to the earth. 
For those who witnessed the scene, and heard the 
declaration of the two angels, it was a lesson never 
to be forgotten, and one that proved an encourage- 
ment to them to their dying day. They came from 
the mount feeling that, at his own appointed time, 
their Master would return to the earth, and wherever 
they went they preached this part of the Gospel, and 
exhorted the believers to " comfort one another with 
these words" (1 Thess. 4: 18). 

The prophecy relating to the second coming of 
Christ may be traced back to the time of Enoch, 
before the flood, for in Jude 14 we read: "And 
Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of 
these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten 
thousands of his saints." Jesus also foretold his 
coming. Read these words from Matt. 25: 31: 
" When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and 
all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon 
the throne of his glory." Time and again he con- 
firms this statement, and especially so in John 14: 3, 
where we read: "And if I go and prepare a place 
for you, I will come again, and receive you unto 
myself; that where I am there ye may be also." 

But no lesson went home to the hearts of the 
apostles like the one given on the Mount of Olives. 


They not only believed that Jesus would return to 
the earth, but they wrote like men who believed 
that doctrine. Peter, who was present, saw the 
ascension, and heard what the two angels said, just 
a little later declared, in one of his addresses, refer- 
ring to the presence of the Lord: "And he shall 
send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto 
you: Whom the heaven must receive until the 
times of restitution of all things" (Acts 3: 20, 21). 
More than thirty years afterwards he wrote: " But 
the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the 
night; in the which the heavens shall pass away 
with a great noise, and the elements shall melt 
with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that 
are therein shall be burned up" (2 Peter 3: 10). 

Paul was not present when the angels spoke of 
the return of the Master, but he, too, became an 
earnest believer in the doctrine, and makes a num- 
ber of references to it in his writings. We present 
but one quotation from him, and in this we have 
him speak fully : " For this we say unto you by the 
word of the Lord, that we which are alive and re- 
main unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent 
them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall 
descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice 
of the archangel, and with the trump of God, and 
the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which 
are alive and remain shall be caught up together 
with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the 
air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord" (1 
Thess. 4: 15-17). No language employed by the 
apostle could more thoroughly have committed 
him to the doctrine we are presenting in this chap- 


ter. There is no explaining it away. It is a straight- 
forward statement, to the effect that Jesus will one 
of these days descend from heaven. As he was 
seen to go into heaven, so he will return in like 
manner. In fact, the prevailing opinion among the 
disciples was the early appearance of their Lord 
and Master. However, " of the day and the hour 
of his coming knoweth no man." But when he 
does appear, he will come on the clouds of heaven, 
accompanied by the angels, and every eye shall be- 
hold him. 

The Resurrection. 

The return of the Master, after an absence of 
hundreds of years, will mean the beginning of a 
new era in the history of the world, with one event 
following in the wake of another. The more strik- 
ing of these events will be the resurrection of the 
righteous dead. Paul makes mention of this in 1 
Thess. 4: 16, saying: "The Lord himself shall de- 
scend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of 
the archangel, and with the trump of God ; and the 
dead in Christ shall rise first." 

The fact that the saints shall rise first shows that 
there is a first, as well as a second resurrection. We 
have a significant reference to this in 1 Cor. 15 : 23, 
where this reading is found : " But every man in his 
own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they 
that are Christ's at his coming." Christ becomes, 
as stated, the firstfruits of the resurrection. In fact, 
he declares: "I am the resurrection" (John 11: 
25). He was crucified, buried and arose from the 


dead the third day, thus being recognized not only 
as the firstfruits of the resurrection, but also as the 
resurrection itself. The resurrection became possi- 
ble only because Jesus broke the bars of death and 
came alive from the tomb, — therefore " the first- 
fruits of them that slept " (1 Cor. 15 : 20). 

Referring again to verse 23, as quoted, we notice 
that after the resurrection of Christ we have the 
resurrection of those " that are Christ's at his com- 
ing." As sure as we have the resurrection of Christ, 
just that certain do we have the resurrection of 
those who have been his faithful followers. Not 
only so, but the resurrection of these takes place at 
the Master's coming. It is a case, in the resurrec- 
tion, of " every man in his own order." First 
Christ, then his followers, and last the unrighteous. 
This doctrine of the first and second resurrection 
is too clearly stated in Rev. 20: 5, 6 to be misunder- 
stood. We have this reading: " But the rest of the 
dead lived not again until the thousand years were 
finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed 
and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection : 
on such the second death hath no power, but they 
shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall 
reign with him a thousand years." 

Here we have the " first resurrection " and the 
" second death " distinctly named, with a period of 
one thousand years between them, the resurrection 
of the righteous being at the beginning of the 
period, and the resurrection of the wicked at the 
end. The statement, " The rest of the dead lived 
not again until the thousand years were finished," 
is further proof of the resurrection of the wicked, 


one thousand years after the resurrection of the 
saints. Since " the dead in Christ shall rise first," 
as Paul states it, " and so shall . . . ever be 
with the Lord" (1 Thess. 4: 17), no wonder that 
John, the author of Revelation, broke forth and 
said : " Blessed and holy is he that hath part in 
the first resurrection." Well may the saints " com- 
fort one another with these words." 

Christ's Personal Reign, 

The coming of Jesus, on the clouds of heaven, and 
accompanied by the holy angels, means the ushering 
in of the millennium or the one thousand years' reign 
of Christ upon the earth. During this period he will 
reign as King of kings and Lord of lords. In a 
brief chapter we can not even name all that may 
possibly take place during this period, as prophe- 
sied by different writers. A reference to a few 
points will be sufficient to arouse interest and to 
comfort those who look forward to the time when 
the people of God can live in a world where right- 
eousness shall prevail as the waters cover the great 

John, in Rev. 20: 1-3, telling about the beginning 
of this period, says: "And I saw an angel come 
down from heaven, having the key of the bottom- 
less pit and a great chain in his hand. And he laid 
hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the 
Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, 
and cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him 
up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive 
the nations no more, till the thousand years should 


be fulfilled." Next comes the resurrection of the 
righteous, as ztated in the previous chapter of this 
work, and then follows the Master's personal reign. 
Notice what is in verses four and five of the 
chapter in Revelation cited, about the one-thou- 
sand-year period : "And they lived and reigned with 
Christ a thousand years." Then it is said that " the 
rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand 
years were finished." We also notice that Satan is 
to be bound a thousand years. These citations 
show that there is to be a period of ten full cen- 
turies when Satan is to have no dominion in the 
world. He is to be bound, and will therefore not 
be permitted to " deceive the nations " until the 
close of the period. 

With Satan bound and the righteous of all pre- 
vious ages being with Christ during his marvelous 
reign, we can look for the most delightful period 
ever known in the history of the world. Wars will 
cease from one end of the earth to the other. All 
the saloons and the sinful dens of this world will 
disappear. All the instruments of warfare, the 
world over, will be converted into articles of utility; 
every fort will be dismantled, and all the warships 
of every nation will be remodeled for the use of a 
righteous people. We may well conclude that the 
world will then be at its best. Strife between na- 
tions, as well as contentions between man and man 
must cease. The controversy between capital and 
labor will cease, and the rule of right will be the 
rule for all nations, tribes and people. Who would 
not want to live in the world during this blessed 
period? Again, we quote the comforting words of 


the Revelator : " Blessed and holy is he that hath 
part in the first resurrection." 

It is painful to think that this happy period, — the 
millennium, — must come to an end. We read that 
at the end of the thousand years Satan " must be 
loosed a little season." Then he will go out " to de- 
ceive the nations which are in the four quarters of 
the earth," possibly Europe, Asia, Africa, and 
America, including the isles of the seas. Now fol- 
lows the greatest strife ever known in the world's 
history. The Satanic power, however, will be bro- 
ken up and the kingdom of Satan completely de- 
stroyed (Rev. 20: 8, 9, 11, 12). After this comes the 
final judgment. 

The Final Judgment. 

For every man and woman two things are cer- 
tain: first death and then the judgment. Or, as the 
writer of Hebrews puts it : " It is appointed unto 
men once to die, but after that the judgment" (9: 
27). Whatever may be said of the judgment we 
pass on ourselves, or the forgiveness of sins, or the 
perfection, or even the happiness to which the 
righteous may attain in this life, there is neverthe- 
less "appointed a day in the which he [God] will 
judge the world in righteousness " (Acts 17: 31). In 
confirmation of this Paul further says : " In the day 
when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus 
Christ according to my gospel" (Rom. 2: 16). 

All the events of earth, — past, present and future, 
— lead up to this great day, — the judgment day. 
The rich and the poor, the great and the small, the 


master and the servant, the oppressor and the op- 
pressed, friends and enemies, as well as the saint 
and the sinner, must face the same tribunal and hear 
the decision from which there is no appeal. In the 
New Testament we have some vivid pictures of the 
judgment scene, and while considering this as the 
culminating event of earth, we do not wish to oc- 
cupy space in discussing the meaning of the word 
" day," as it applies to the time of the judgment, or 
the location of the final tribunal. We emphasize 
the great and solemn fact that the judgment for 
every human being of earth is a matter of absolute 

In Rev. 20: 11-15 John describes the scene as it 
appeared to him : " I saw a great white throne, and 
him that sat on it." He then continues: "And I 
saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; 
and the books were opened : and another book was 
opened, which is the book of life : and the dead were 
judged out of those things which were written in 
the books, according to their works. And the sea 
gave up the dead which were in it; and death and 
hell delivered up the dead which were in them : and 
they were judged every man according to their 

This judgment scene, however, was preceded by 
the general resurrection, for the sea gave up her 
dead, and even Hades, or the unseen world, gave 
up its dead, and all were judged together. We are 
then told that the " books were opened," — possibly 
the Old and New Testaments, — and then the 
" book of life," and the dead were judged out of 
the things written in these books. It is further 


stated, in verse fifteen, that " whosoever was not 
found written in the book of life, was cast into the 
lake of fire. ,, Notice another description. 

The scene is graphically described by Jesus him- 
self in Matt. 25: 31-46. His description is intro- 
duced by a reference to his second coming, in which 
he says : " When the Son of man shall come in his 
glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall 
he sit upon the throne of his glory.'' He omits 
what John later on records concerning the binding 
of Satan, his one thousand years' reign upon the 
earth, and the destruction of Satan's kingdom. He 
describes the judgment scene by saying that " be- 
fore him shall be gathered all nations : and he shall 
separate them one from another, as a shepherd 
divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall 
set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on 
the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his 
right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit 
the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation 
of the world." And after presenting the reason for 
accepting the one class and rejecting the other, he 
adds: "And these [the disobedient] shall go away 
into everlasting punishment ; but the righteous into 
life eternal." This ends the judgment scene, with 
the books closed and that, too, forever. 

The Destiny of the Wicked. 

No one can read the Bible without being reminded, 
at almost every turn, of the displeasure of the Lord 
with those who deliberately refuse to walk in his 
ways. What is said of the punishment meted out to 


the ungodly antediluvians, and the wicked inhabitants 
of Sodom and Gomorrah, as well as to others, shows 
how he deals with sin. While he is a loving Father, 
and is disposed to deal kindly with the erring, yet he 
is just, and can not, and will not tolerate persistent 
and willful disobedience. 

For man he has done all, and even more, than rea- 
son would demand. He even gave his only Son to 
suffer and die, that men and women might be re- 
deemed from their sins, and placed in a position to 
accept eternal life. But when they deliberately reject 
the easy terms of salvation, refuse to acknowledge 
the God who made them, trample under foot the mer- 
cies of heaven, and dishonor the Son who died for 
them, what else could such people expect, aside from 
banishment from the presence of the Lord? 

It is useless to attempt to reason away the idea of 
a future place of punishment for the wicked. The 
wisest of men would never think of running a govern- 
ment without jails and penitentiaries. Something, 
they say, must be done with the law-breakers. Should 
we expect God to run a world like this without a place 
of confinement for the wicked? They can not be re- 
formed; they can not be made fit subjects for heaven, 
and what is to be done with them? 

It is sad to think of men and women being sent 
away into everlasting punishment (Matt. 25: 46), 
but this is what the Master says will happen to the 
disobedient. Not only so, but he says the time is 
coming, in the winding up of the affairs of the human 
race, when the Judge of all the earth will say : " De- 
part from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, pre- 


pared for the devil and his angels" (Matt. 25: 41). 
We read that the rich man (Luke 16) lifted up his 
eyes in hades, being in torment. Then we have the 
Psalmist (9: 17) saying: " The wicked shall be turned 
into hell, and all the nations that forget God." And 
to this we may yet add the words of the Master, when 
contrasting the destiny of the righteous with that of 
the wicked : " But the children of the kingdom shall 
be cast into outer darkness : there shall be weeping and 
gnashing of teeth" (Matt. 8: 12). 

All of this is fearful to contemplate, but let it be 
remembered that the disobedient have had warning, 
year after year, and have been given ample time to re- 
pent, and to make their " calling and election sure." 
When everything possible has been done to save the 
ungodly, and they will simply not be saved, they have 
no one to blame but themselves. Hell has been made 
for the wicked, and if people persist in traveling on 
the broad way " that leadeth to destruction," what 
else can be expected but that they, like Dives, will 
some sad day open their eyes in hades, being in tor- 
ment? It is but the logical ending of a life of diso- 
bedience, however unfortunate the fate, and it is use- 
less to minimize the terrible consequences. 

The Home of the Righteous. 

" Mother, home and heaven," are said to be the 
sweetest words in the English language, with heaven, 
the home of the righteous, standing at the head of 
the list. Heaven, the abode of the angels, and the 
final dwelling place of the blessed, has always been 
looked upon as the embodiment of everything that 


goes to make up true happiness. It means the end of 
life's journey, be it long or short, and the final and 
eternal resting place of the Christian pilgrim. About 
the land of eternal rest and never-ending bliss, poets 
have sung, authors have written, orators have dis- 
coursed and saints have dreamed, until the world 
resounds with praise to the God who, through his 
Son, and by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, has made 
it accessible to all the faithful and true of earth. 

Running through the Bible, from Genesis to Rev- 
elation, there is a continuous reference to the final 
abode of the righteous. From Enoch to Jacob at 
Bethel, from Bethel to the translation of Elijah, and 
again from Elijah to the ascension of the Master, 
and to the New Jerusalem, which John saw coming 
down from God, out of heaven, we have one reference 
after another to the " land of pure delight where 
saints immortal reign." We need not pause to dis- 
cuss the location, or the probable features of heaven. 
We know it to be a reality, and that the God, who 
made the vast universe, with the unnumbered stars, 
has also provided a dwelling place for his people. 
Jesus at one time comforted his disciples by saying: 
" In my Father's house are many mansions, . . . 
I go to prepare a place for you" (John 14: 2). 

Paul had clear conceptions of heaven. He tells us 
that one time in his life he was caught up into the 
third heaven, the paradise of God, whether in the 
body, or out of the body, he could not tell, but he 
knew that he was there, and heard things that he was 
not permitted to relate (2 Cor. 12: 2-4). After this 
experience he could well say : " For we know that if 


our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, 
we have a building of God, an house not made with 
hands, eternal in the heavens " (2 Cor. 5:1). Heaven 
was not a theory with him. It was not even a matter 
of faith. It was more, for it was a matter of actual 
knowledge and experience. Hence he could consist- 
ently say, " We know." Not only so, but he could, 
with equal confidence, look forward to the time of his 
reward. Of this he speaks, after he had fought the 
good fight, and kept the faith, and was nearing the 
end of his course : " Henceforth there is laid up for 
me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the 
righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not 
to me only, but unto all them also that love his ap- 
pearing " (2 Tim. 4:8). 

No finer picture of the home of the righteous was 
ever shown than that seen by John and described in 
Rev. 21. He " saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, 
coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as 
a bride for her husband." He tells of the jasper walls, 
the pearly gates and the gold-paved streets. This is 
not only a picture of the church in her renovated 
state, but a most vivid representation of the glory, 
charm and beauty of heaven itself. 

A home in heaven, and life eternal: this is the 
reward of the righteous. This has been the dream 
of the faithful of every age and clime. Like Paul, 
they died in the faith, knowing that a crown of life 
and a " house not made with hands, eternal in the 
heavens " awaits them. To all such Jesus has said : 
" Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the king- 
dom prepared for you from the foundation of the 


world" (Matt. 25: 34). Then, speaking of the joy 
and comfort of the blessed, he says: "They shall 
come from the east, and from the west, and from 
the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in 
the kingdom of God" (Luke 13: 29). In another 
place (Matt. 8: 11) we are told that the saved shall 
" sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in 
the kingdom of heaven." It will not be the mere joy 
of sitting down with the righteous of all ages, but 
it will also be a matter of future recognition. Those 
who are permitted to associate with Abraham and 
others in the paradise of God, will soon learn to know 
them. They will know Paul, and all the apostles, 
along with Moses and Elijah. The two latter were 
recognized while in their glorified state on the Mount 
of Transfiguration, and of course will be recognized 
in heaven by the redeemed. And if all of this is true, 
— and it certainly is, — then friends shall know each 
other when they meet in the final kingdom. 

In view of what is in reservation for the redeemed, 
heaven and eternal life are not only worth striving 
for, but are of far more value than all the wealth 
and honors of earth. Well has it been said, " Eye 
hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered 
into the heart of man, the things which God hath 
prepared for them that love him" (1 Cor. 2: 9). 

" My heav'nly home is bright and fair, 
Nor pain nor death can enter there; 
Its glitt'ring tow'rs the sun outshine, 
That heav'nly mansion shall be mine." 

o . » » 

Date Loaned 

* _ "Mi 



w Ju; *m 

l ^ 

,2 ;^AV- 
■V '1969 3 


' V 


Library Bureau Cat. No. 1138 

5 0252 971 

Moo re, J. H. 


The ^ew Testament Doc-